argument64 ice 第7次作业

ice_ykUID: 2909502

The following appeared in a memo from the Dean of the College of Education at Omni State University.

"
Furthermore, a recent study shows that students who have mastered Latin perform much better in logic and critical thinking. Thus, in order to increase the percentage of our high school students who graduate from college as well as to ensure that they receive a better education in critical thinking, Omni State University should begin an intensive program to prepare our future teachers to teach high school Latin."


The dean suggests that Omni State University prepare their future teachers to teach high school Latin given given that Latin help increase the percentage of high school students who go to university and is beneficial in students’ logic and critical thinking. To support his assertion, the author points that over 80% of the graduates who study in Latin at the only seven high schools that teach Latin enroll in college, what is more, students who study Latin perform better in logic and critical thinking. However, this passage is problematic in several places.

To begin with, the author cites a problematic evidence to support that Latin help high school students enroll in college. Perhaps graduates who study Latin enroll in college not because of Latin but other reasons, such as perfect scores for all courses, excellent papers, plentiful experiment experiences, to name a few. Moreover, the author does not mention whether the Latin course is must or choicful for students. If Latin is not a necessary course for students, they may study it carelessly, let alone relying on Latin to enroll in college.

In the second place, even if students who study Latin go to college because of Latin, the author provides no evidence that this event is representative. Perhaps the number of students who study Latin is particular small, for example, ten, then the number of students who go to college just because of Latin is eight. However, the number of all graduates is 1000, thus this event is actully of no representation.

In the third place, the author provides unwarranted evidence that Latin help students in logic and critical thinking. Is the study believable? For the mehtod to justify students’ level of critical thinking is possibly subjective and cannot reflect the real condition. Or perhaps it is because that students are smart enough to study Latin, just not the case as the author says. Therefore, a deepr study should be developed to know the relationship between Latin and critical thinking.

Last, it should be questioned that whether Latin course is suited for all high schools in Omni State? Perhaps the seven high schools that offer courses in Latin are in the first class across the state. However, other high schools are not proper to do the same as the best schools. A hurry conclusion may lead to unnecessary waste.

To sum up, students go to college may not because of Latin but other reasons, and Latin may also has little relationship with students’ logic and critical thinking. The author should provide more evidence to support his suggestion.

waxtearUID: 2904420

issue64revised