argument61 G-89-互助社-8月14日同主题写作 请拍

jason0926UID：200697

61.The following appeared in a report by the School District of Eyleria.
'Nationally, the average ratio of computers to students in kindergarten through grade 12 (K-12) is 1:5. Educators indicate that this is very good ratio. This means that across the country, all students have access to and can use computers daily in their classrooms. In Eyleria's K-12 schools, the ratio of computers to students is 1:7. This number is sufficient to ensure that all of Eyleria's students, by the time they graduate from high school, will be fully proficient in the use of computer technology. Thus, there is no reason to spend any of the schools' budget on computers or other technology in the next few years.'

In this argument, the arguer asserts that the Eyleria's K-12 schools have no reason to spend budgets on computers or other technology in the next few years. To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that the ratio, in Eyleria's K-12 schools, is sufficient to ensure that all students can be fully proficient in the use of computers . However, this alone neither constitutes a logical argument in favor of the conclusion nor provides compelling support making the argument sound. The arguer ignores certain important concerns, which must be addressed to prove. In my point of view, the argument suffers from three flaws.

First of all, the arguer only points out the ratio of computers of Eyleria's K-12 schools, but he or she does not provide evidence to demonstrate that every student can satisfactorily use the computers, after all, on average, seven people just have one computer. So it is possible that some can not use the computer fully or even never use it. Moreover, do these computers belong to school or person and whether the ratio 1:7 contains the number of personal computers. If it is a fact, the computers that students can use in schools are less.

In addition, the average situation of nation is not equal to the situation of Eyleria, that is said, it is possible that the average level of Eyleria is far under the average of nation. Moreover, the average ratio of computers 1:5 is a good ratio, but whether the ratio 1:7 is also a good or enough ratio? Whether the ratio 1:7 can explain that the number of computers is sufficient for using? Furthermore, there is no evidence to show that the difference of level between nation and Eyleria. Maybe it attests that the schools need to spend more money on computers.

Finally, even if the number of computer is enough, but due to changing with each passing day of technology, the students can not only study old technology. Moreover, there are many other technologies allowing students to study, so it is unadvisable that school denies to spend more budgets on computers or other technology. If to do so, students can not develop well and their abilities also can not be improved.


To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact, it is neither sound nor persuasive. Not only does it leave out such key issues, but also cites in the analysis the evidence, which does not lend strong support to what the arguer claims. If the argument includes the given factors discussed above, it would have been more thorough and adequate.

[ Last edited by jason0926 on 2005-8-15 at 23:37 ]