Argument203 【☆09GRE作文冲刺组】swbai3月4日作文

swbaiUID: 2600532

题目：ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
字数：426          用时：0:30:00          日期：2009-3-4
In this newsletter the author recommends that smaller, nonprofit hospitals are more economical and of better quality compared with larger, for-profit hospitals. To support this recommendation, the author cites the following facts about smaller, nonprofit hospitals: (1) they are small; (2) the patients stay in these hospitals are shouter and the cure rate is twice as that is in large hospital; (3) the employees per patient in small hospital is more than large hospital. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

First, the hospital is small do not necessary indicate that the hospital has a better quality. For the small hospital, buying some expensive equipment is always unachievable, and this equipment is critical to the patient who has serious disease. Perhaps the best way for a patient who has a bad disease is to find a hospital which is larger. Or perhaps the small hospital is basically nonprofit, and cannot attract better doctor, which is also essential to the patients. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for the hospital is small the author can not convince me on the basis that small hospital can provide better quality.

Secondly, even if the patients in small hospital have shorter stay and a better cure rate, the author assumes further that the quality of small hospital is better. Yet the newsletter contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that the patients go to the small hospital only for small disease, while go to the large hospital for critical disease. In fact, perhaps the disease that treated by large hospital is so serious, that small hospital even cannot treat it at all.

Finally, the number of employees per patient is more in small hospital accomplishes nothing toward bolstering the recommendation. It could be much cost for small hospital, for it cannot gain much profit but have to spend more. Besides, this could be the reason that small hospital is nonprofit. Moreover, because large hospital has better control on patients, the number of employees per patient is fewer, but has more efficiency than that of small hospital.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the author must provide clear evidence--perhaps by study or survey in Saluda and Megaville--that nonprofit hospital have the same equipment as large hospital, and better treatment as well. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know which kind of patient usually go to the small hospital.

_xtUID: 2599830

ARGUMENT203 - The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."
字数：426          用时：0:30:00          日期：2009-3-4
In this newsletter the author recommends that smaller, nonprofit hospitals are more economical and of better quality compared with larger, for-profit hospitals. To support this recommendation, the author cites the following facts about smaller, nonprofit hospitals: (1) they are small; (2) the patients stay in these hospitals are shouter(shorter, 提炼句子后成patients are short， 主语不对~这句得改下~) and the cure rate is twice as that is in large hospitals（因为冒号前用的也是复数）; (3) the employees per patient in small hospital is more than large hospital（主谓也不对哦~the number of employees is larger 或者 employees are more）. Close scrutiny of each of these facts（each 后用复数~？）, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.

First, （that，觉得完整句子用作主语应该有引导词~~）the hospital is small do not necessary（necessarily）
indicate that the hospital has a better quality. For the small hospital, buying some expensive equipment is always unachievable, and this equipment is critical to the patient who has serious disease. Perhaps the best way for a patient who has a bad disease is to find a hospital which is larger.（这句说得有点绝对了~~加个perhaps） Or perhaps the small hospital is basically nonprofit, and cannot attract better doctor, which is also essential to the patients. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for the hospital is small the author can not convince me on the basis that small hospital can provide better quality.

Secondly, even if the patients in small hospital have shorter stay and a better cure rate（better cure rate？？）, the author assumes further that the quality of small hospital is better. Yet the newsletter contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that the patients go to the small hospital only for small disease, while go to the large hospital for critical disease. In fact, perhaps the disease that treated by large hospital is so serious, that small hospital even cannot treat it at all.

Finally, the number of employees per patient is more in small hospital accomplishes nothing toward bolstering the recommendation. It could be much cost for small hospital, for it cannot gain much profit but have to spend more. Besides, this could be the reason that small hospital is nonprofit. Moreover, because large hospital has better control on patients, the number of employees per patient is fewer, but has more efficiency than that of small hospital.

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the author must provide clear evidence--perhaps by study or survey in Saluda and Megaville--that nonprofit hospital have the same equipment as large hospital, and better treatment as well. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know which kind of patient usually go to the small hospital.

主谓一致问题需要注意下~
不过不要依赖模板，那只是个架子，大家都有的，并不能帮你得分，重点在于分析！...LZ继续加油！