argument174 决战830拍砖组 22日作业 同主题高频狂练,请兄弟们狂拍

caogenmanchiUID: 2127136

argument174  第8篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：36分28秒     340 words

----------题目----------
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.'

------正文------
In the recommendation, the arguer claims that it is unnecessary for Grove College to increase its students that it admits men into its programs. To substantiate the recommendation, the arguer cites two surveys on the attitudes of students on the coeducation. At first glance, it is somewhat convincing. However, after close examination I believe that the recommendation is undermined by the following fallacies.

First of all, there is no evidence provided that the survey is creditable. The amounts of the samples in the two surveys all are not mentioned. However, the sample size is crucial to the creditability of the surveys. If it is small, the samples can not be representative of all students. Furthermore, two surveys mentioned are separate and so it is possible that their context such as the questions and the ways that the questions are asked are different. In my experience, the questions and ways all affect the results of the survey. Unfortunately, the arguer fails to provide them which should be presented.

Secondly, the argument is undermined by the fact that the arguer fail to establish the causal relation between the attitude on coeducation of the students and the amount of students. It is entirely possible that although the students oppose coeducation, they still stay the college if the governing committee decides to realize coeducation in it. If it is true, the results of the survey will be unmeaning.

Last and perhaps the most important factor, the attitude of the potential students is not taken into account by the arguer. It is their attitudes on coeducation that determine the amount of student enrolling in Grove College. Therefore, a creditable survey on the potential students' attitudes on coeducation in Grove College is extremely needed.

In summary, the recommendation is not persuasive as it stands. The arguer should present more information on the two surveys and the causal relation between the attitude on coeducation of the students, the amount of students, and the survey mentioned in the above paragraph is needed before a relevant recommendation is reached.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-22 at 22:59 ]

nanziUID: 2126362

In the recommendation, the arguer claims that it is unnecessary for Grove College to increase its students that it admits men into its programs. To substantiate the recommendation, the arguer cites two surveys on the attitudes of students (注意two survey的对象不一样哦，应该加上and alumni) on the (the去掉) coeducation. At first glance, it is somewhat convincing. However, after close examination I believe that the recommendation is undermined by the following fallacies. （开头段不错）

First of all, there is no evidence provided that the survey is creditable. The amounts （amounts用在这里不合适吧，应该是the number of respondents） of the samples in the two surveys all (改为both) are not mentioned. However (However改为after all或since 可能更好一些), the sample size is crucial to the creditability of the surveys. If it is （加上too）small, the samples can not be representative of all students. Furthermore, two surveys mentioned are separate and so it is possible that their context such as the questions and the ways that the questions are asked are different. (are separate 意思好像没说清楚，整句改为…the two surveys mentioned may be different in questioning patterns and the way questions are presented) In my experience, the questions and ways all affect the results of the survey. Unfortunately, the arguer fails to provide them which should be presented.

Secondly, the argument is undermined by the fact that the arguer fail to establish the causal relation between the attitude on coeducation of the students and the amount of students. It is entirely possible that although the students oppose coeducation, they still stay the college if the governing committee decides to realize coeducation in it. If it is true, the results of the survey will be unmeaning. (这一段论证好像有问题啊，题目中并没有说担心学生会离开学校，而只是要保持学生的士气)
Last and perhaps the most important factor, the attitude （attitudes） of the potential students is not taken into account by the arguer. It is their attitudes on coeducation that determine the amount of student enrolling in Grove College. Therefore, a creditable survey on the potential students' attitudes on coeducation in Grove College is extremely needed. (这一段你的意思好像是要把将要入学的学生算到调查对象里去吧，论述的不够充分)
In summary, the recommendation is not persuasive as it stands. The arguer should present more information on the two surveys and the causal relation between the attitude on coeducation of the students, the amount of students, and the survey mentioned in the above paragraph is needed before a relevant[/color]（an ultimate virtual） recommendation is reached.

文章的结构是完整的，
不足在于论证部分意思的表达，
多练习（尤其是坚持限时是很可贵的，限时的文章不好写，偶深有体会），多熟悉一下模板的结构语言应该问题不大啦。
caogenmanchi，加油！！

caogenmanchiUID: 2127136

关于这篇我有个疑问，既然是百年女校，怎么有男校友呢？

nanziUID: 2126362

哪里说到了？？

caogenmanchiUID: 2127136

应该把题目中的alumni改为alumna,孙元和宋版都都这个错误

caogenmanchiUID: 2127136

In the recommendation, the arguer claims that it is unnecessary for Grove College to increase its students that it admits men into its programs. To substantiate the recommendation, the arguer cites two surveys on the attitudes of students and alumna on coeducation. At first glance, it is somewhat convincing. However, after close examination I believe that the recommendation is undermined by the following fallacies.

First of all, there is no evidence provided that the survey is creditable. The number of respondents in the two surveys both is not mentioned. After all, the sample size is crucial to the creditability of the surveys. If it is too small, the samples can not be representative of all students. Furthermore, the two surveys mentioned may be different in questioning patterns and the ways questions are presented. In my experience, the patterns and ways all affect the results of the survey. Unfortunately, the arguer fails to provide them which should be presented.

Secondly, the argument is undermined by the fact that the arguer fail to establish the causal relation between the attitudes on coeducation of the students and alumna and the number of students. The arguer pointed out that keeping all-female education will improve morale among students and convince alumna to keep supporting the college financially. However, there is no evidence provided that the students’ morale and the alumna’s financial support affect the number of students in Grove College. It is entirely possible that although the students and alumna oppose coeducation, their attitudes on coeducation will not affect the number of students in Grove College if the governing committee decides to realize coeducation in it. If it is true, the results of the survey will be unmeaning.

Last and perhaps the most important factor, the attitudes of the potential students is not taken into account by the arguer. It is their attitudes on coeducation that determine the amount of student enrolling in Grove College. If the coeducation indeed will increases the number of students in the college in future and along with its tuition, the attitudes of students and alumna could be neglected to some extent. Therefore, a creditable survey on the potential students' attitudes on coeducation in Grove College is extremely needed.

In summary, the recommendation is not persuasive as it stands. The arguer should present more information on the two surveys and the causal relation between the attitude on coeducation of the students, the amount of students, and the survey mentioned in the above paragraph is needed before an ultimate virtual recommendation is reached.