Argument110【超越自我小组】第二次作业

zugurrrUID: 2482827

110The following appeared in a memo from the Principal of Sherwood Junior High School.

"It appears that the lighting in Sherwood High's classrooms, which have large windows but minimal overhead light sources, is impairing student academic performance and teacher morale. Records show that during December and January, the two months with the fewest hours of daylight, attendance rates fall, average daily class participation drops, and grades decline. Teacher resignations are also highest during these months. According to a study of Tundra Vocational School, which experiences entire seasons with little daylight, students' grade point averages increased when Day Glow light bulbs, which mimic sunlight, were installed in classrooms. This study suggests that Sherwood can improve students' academic performance and teachers' morale by using Day Glow light bulbs in winter."

The conclusion of the statement is that by using day Glow light bulbs in winter the Sherwood improve students' performance and teachers' morale. To support it, the arguer provides the records in Sherwoold High school the minimal overhead light lead to the decrease of the students' class participation and grades, and to result into more teachers' resignations. Meanwhile he convince that due to equipment with the Day Glow light bulbs Tundra Vocational School increase its students' grades. However for the conclusion, the evidences from the argument above are premature and unwarranted.

First, if the lighting in Sherwood High's classrooms impairs students and teachers, the arguer should provider the proof to support the causal relationship between them. But there is no information about how the lighting affects the student's performance or the teacher's morale. Does it cause some disease or potentials harm for the victim's physiques or psychology? Or dose it hurt the eyes of people in these classroom. Without dealing with these problems, it cannot convince people that the lighting is the reason of the performance of students and teachers.

Second, the argues fails to prove that the very reason of students' falling attendance rates, daily class participation, and grades as well as the teachers' more resignations are the lighting problem. The common sense tells that elements affecting students' school performances and teachers' resignations are various such as the school's location, level of management and teaching quality. And two months are so short period that during this period the decline of the average students performance cannot to prove that the appearance of problem of school. It is possible belong to the normal decline of the general tendency through the long time.

Third, there is no evidence to support that the increase of the Sherwood High school students' grades is the result from the use of Day Glow light. If the superior performance of them is because of the teacher's improving of teaching methods or the critical management of school at that time, then the assumption would fail to support its study. Moreover, the study needs more details including at least the differences between the students under other lighting bulbs at the same condition. Therefore, the study of Sherwood is premature to support the better performance is due to the Day Glow bulbs.

At last, given the assumptions above are correct, of course that is impossible, it is unwarranted that the Day Glow bulbs can work as well in Sherwood as that in Thundra high school. The arguer fail to provide the evidence of the same or similar circumstance of the school. If there are differences of the qualities of students and teachers between the two school, the changes of the schedule classes, or even the uncommon climates. Then there are possibilities that the efficiency of the Day Glow bulbs will be diminished or disappearances. On the other hand, whether is the Day Glow bulbs, which even if improve the Thundra high school students, the very need of the Sherwood high school that  may need other approaches rather than this bulbs.

In sum, without the detail evidence to support the causal relevance of lighting and poor performance of students and teachers' morale, as well as lacking the proofs of the similar environment, students and teachers level between these two schools, it is unwarranted and vague to prove the Day Glow bulbs will work in Sherwood high school. And to prove that, the arguer needs provide the valid evidence that these bulbs improve the student performance of Thundra high school. Therefore the suggestion to use of these bulbs is unwarranted and misleading.