argument61 熊熊组作业--from熊熊~互拍！

sebarinaUID：2108158

最近写的超级没状态~大家狠狠拍！！！
互拍留链接！
---------------------------------
The author claims that there is no reason to spend any of Eyleria schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years. He or she provides a series of facts and some data, in order to illustrate that, the ratio of computers to students is very good and can assure all the students have proficient skills on computers. The argument seems reasonable, but after careful examination, we will find several flaws in the deduction and conclusion.

A threshold problem is that the author makes a hasty deduction from the national wide data. Although the ratio of computers to students--1:5--is very good as concerned by many educators, there is no reason to deduce that all students have access to and can use computers daily in classrooms. At first, the author does not mention whether the ratios of different age-stages are the same. Maybe children in kindergarten have little chance to touch computers, and thus the deduction could not be made among all the students. Secondly, even if the ratio of each age-stage is the same, there is no evidence to illustrate the computers will be provided to students and ensure their using times.

A second problem is a false data deduction in the argument. The author reasons that since the ratio of Eyleria is 1:7, the computer number is sufficient. However, after careful scrutiny, we will find the ratio 1:7 is smaller than 1:5, which could not be used to compare with the national wide average. Therefore, there is no reason to conclude the number of computers in Eyleria is enough, albeit, the educators national wide think the ratio is good.

A third problem involves the claim that the sufficient number of computers will make sure the students' proficiency on computers, which is lack of information. The author does not tell us whether the education of computer is significant in Eyleria, without which the assumption is totally ungrounded. If the teachers are not very proficient themselves and students are not interested in studying computers, it is possible that when students graduate from high school, they are not skilled at computers technology not mentioning proficient with it. Without ruling out the possibility, the author could not make the hasty conclusion.

A final problem is that the author fails to takes time changes into consideration. Even if all the mentioned above can be testified, the author could not concludes that the school have no reason spending budget on computers in the next few years. Perhaps the number of students increases in the future, and perhaps the computer will be out of date. Without take these scenarios into consideration, the author could not make the conclusion convincing.

To sum up, the argument is not as warrant as it stands. To support his view, the author needs to correct his false deduction of ratio on computers, and provides enough evidence on the acquire of proficiency computer ability. In addition, the author also needs to take future changes into consideration.

duckyl35UID：201612

The author claims that there is no reason to spend any of Eyleria schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years. He or she provides a series of facts and some data, in order to illustrate that, the ratio of computers to students is very good and can assure all the students have proficient skills on computers. The argument seems reasonable, but after careful examination, we will find several flaws in the deduction and conclusion.开头简练，没地说～:)8错！

A threshold problem is that the author makes a hasty deduction from the national wide data. Although the ratio of computers to students--1:5--is very good as concerned by many educators, there is no reason to deduce that all students have access to and can use computers daily in classrooms. At first, the author does not mention whether the ratios of different age-stages are the same. Maybe children in kindergarten have little chance to touch computers, and thus the deduction could not be made among all the students. Secondly, even if the ratio of each age-stage is the same, there is no evidence to illustrate the computers will be provided to students and ensure their using times.

A second problem is a false data deduction in the argument. The author reasons that since the ratio of Eyleria is 1:7, the computer number is sufficient. However, after careful scrutiny, we will find the ratio 1:7 is smaller than 1:5, which could not be used to compare with the national wide average. Therefore, there is no reason to conclude the number of computers in Eyleria is enough, albeit, the educators national wide think the ratio is good.

A third problem involves the claim that the sufficient number of computers will make sure the students' proficiency on computers, which is lack of information. The author does not tell us whether the education of computer is significant in Eyleria, without which the assumption is totally ungrounded. If the teachers are not very proficient themselves and students are not interested in studying computers, it is possible that when students graduate from high school, they are not skilled at computers technology not mentioning proficient with it. Without ruling out the possibility, the author could not make the hasty conclusion.

A final problem is that the author fails to takes time changes into consideration. Even if all the mentioned above can be testified, the author could not concludes that the school have no reason spendingspend budget on computers in the next few years. Perhaps the number of students increases in the future, and perhaps the computer will be out of date. Without taketaking these scenarios into consideration, the author could not make the conclusion convincing.

To sum up, the argument is not as warrant as it stands. To support his view, the author needs to correct his false deduction of ratio on computers, and provides enough evidence on the acquire of proficiency computer ability. In addition, the author also needs to take future changes into consideration.

看完了，感觉挺好的啊！一点点小错都找出来了，这文要是4分，那偶就不用考啦……:rolleyes:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=318537  :handshake
看看偶地，熊熊就有信心啦！:)