ARGUMENT242【DIES IN FLAMES 0910G长线突破组】TASK I ddcmj519

ddcmj519UID: 176326

俺来亮菜刀了。。没磨过。。so。比较钝。。来帮俺磨吧~thx先~~~~:loveliness:
以下是分析，楼下贴习作。。。

242The following appeared as an editorial in the student newspaper of Groveton College.

"To combat the recently reported dramatic rise in cheating among college and university students, these institutions should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced an old-fashioned system in which students were closely monitored by teachers and an average of thirty cases of cheating per year was reported. The honor code has proven far more successful: in the first year it was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey conducted by the Groveton honor council, a majority of students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without."

分析：
因为G用了honor codes取代监视
使作弊数下降，and 调查显示有助于此。因此，other institutions 应该试下这个方法。
1.假定学生素质如从前一样，只是因为honor codes 使他们不敢作弊，因此不能仅因为数据下降就认为是honor codes 的因素。学生的素质有可能得到提高，也有可能他们用了更高科技的手段让他们不被发现。
2.数据。额。。这个鸡肋的问题。。数据仅为被发现的案例，因为不仔细监视了，同学之间又不一定会相互揭发。(被认为是下三路的攻击方式，放弃之。)而且，在一开始急速下降，有可能因为honor codes在一开始确实对他们有些作用，但是在后来的5年里，下降的较为缓慢，可能作弊者已经习惯了这一做法，为了成绩嘛。（额。不是太确定这点到底要不要。因为觉得不是很站得住。。）
3.survey并不能表明honor codes的有效性，在没有使用honor codes之前，并没有做过类似调查，因此并不能表明这两个孰好孰坏，in fact，这两个显然都能让童鞋们less likely to cheat。而且，对这个survey的真实性还有待商榷，as 大家在调查中总是不自觉的表现的更理智些，but things will be different when there is an exam.

ddcmj519UID: 176326

The argument is organized by offering statistics and a survey to prove that the application of honor codes and notifying suspects has do great moral good. It is may seems logical for an institution, who may adopt honor codes, to take the reduction of cheating cases reported and the conclusion of the survey all are the results of the six-year-old legacy.

However, the writer is failing to consider other alternatives that may lead to the decline of cheating cases other than the honor codes. Such alternatives may include that, first of all, in these six years, students’ morality may have improved due to, for instance, the wide use of “honesty record” to make students be aware of the consequences of cheating. Besides, as there appear hi-tech cheating affairs, I can also say that the decline of reported cheating can also be a result of the development of cheater’s facilities, which are far more advanced than ever ，enough to allow students to cheat without any difficulty as well as any chance to be noted by others. Even if these are only suggestions, the potential tendency of the statistics still needs to examine. The sliding of the data in the first year makes us believe that the honor codes did have great effects at the beginning. But years later, as in the recent five years it only shows a relatively low speed of decreasing of all, simply forgetting some fluctuations during this period that may occur, why can’t we doubt whether the number will drop in the future? It appears to be reasonable to believe that students can adjust to the policy as they gradually find that manipulation can be exerted. Reconsidering the data, we can also find that the author only offers the number of cases reported instead of the cheating rate when the number compare with the amount of students in Groveton. The students’ amount can also reduce during the six years, which a rocketing rate can be suggested to make the cheating rate climb rather than fall. All will lead to the down-going of the cheating cases reported, regardless of the application of honor codes.

Another doubt also arises when we focus on the survey which indicates that students who sign the honor codes are less likely to cheat. However, the survey’s point is on whether to sign will help rather than compare to the old-fashioned style that teacher monitored closely, which can obviously not be taken as a proof of the efficiency of honor codes, as the survey can not tell the differences between the old and the new. And moreover, the survey concludes that the majority of students show their determination to be honesty while the cheating cases reported are only about the minority of students. In this way, students who involve the survey may have never considered cheating from the very beginning. Furthermore, survey is done when students are not in the environment of a test, thus the result of which is somehow not reliable enough based on the ground that students, even every human, have the tendency to be perfect and cover their defects when interviewed. That is to say, students may say that they are less likely to cheat, but when they finally do their papers, concerning the grade of the course and the effects of it, such as the chances of scholarship, they inevitably take the less-likely side, to cheat, to get higher marks, and, to gain more for the substantial and spiritual. In sum, the survey is not a convincible reason for the institution to adopt the honor codes as it only supply facts that are limited relevant to the honor codes.

In shrinking, the reasons that stand behind honor codes are arranged by the writer who owns a preference before writing, and consequentially, reasons that seem logical are actually lack of further consideration for the reason that the writer is to sell the idea out. However, before settling down, the writer should gather more details of the cheating rates and take surveys that focus on the cheaters and the comparison of other methods.

xylibbyUID: 2432289

第一次改文章，水平有限，如有冒犯之处请谅解。我觉得你这篇文章写得挺好的，670+啊，崇拜一下。The argument is organized by offering statistics and a survey to prove that the application of honor codes and notifying suspects has do great moral good. It is may seems logical for an institution, who may adopt honor codes, to take the reduction of cheating cases reported and the conclusion of the survey all are the results of the six-year-old legacy. (开头没有模版的感觉,很新颖。虽然题目里讲的是1年加5年的效果，但不一定是个six-year-old legacy吧。吹毛求锱了。)

However, the writer is failing to consider other alternatives that may lead to the decline of cheating cases other than the honor codes. Such alternatives may include that, first of all, in these six years, students’ morality may have improved due to, for instance, the wide use of “honesty record” to make students be aware of the consequences of cheating. Besides, as there appear hi-tech cheating affairs, I can also say that the decline of reported cheating can also be a result of the development of cheater’s facilities, which are far more advanced than ever ，enough to allow students to cheat without any difficulty as well as(感觉有点不好懂，觉得是于enough…连的)any chance to be noted by others. （这点挺实际的，嘿嘿）Even if these are only suggestions, （让步？）the potential tendency of the statistics still needs to examine. The sliding of the data in the first year makes us believe that the honor codes did have great effects at the beginning. But years later, as in the recent five years it only shows a relatively low speed of decreasing of all, simply forgetting some fluctuations during this period that may occur, why can’t we doubt whether the number will drop in the future? It appears to be reasonable to believe that students can adjust to the policy as they gradually find that manipulation can be exerted. （觉得这点攻击的很好） Reconsidering the data, we can also find that the author only offers the number of cases reported instead of the cheating rate when the number compare with the amount of students in Groveton. The students’ amount can also reduce during the six years, which a rocketing rate can be suggested to make the cheating rate climb rather than fall. All （possibilities stated above? 感觉有点指代模糊） will lead to the down-going of the cheating cases reported, regardless of the application of honor codes. （层层剖析列举其他可能性，论证很充分）
Another doubt also arises when we focus on the survey which indicates that students who sign the honor codes are less likely to cheat. However, the survey’s point is on whether to sign will help rather than compare to the old-fashioned style that teacher monitored closely, which can obviously not be taken as a proof of the efficiency of honor codes, as the survey can not tell the differences between the old and the new. And moreover, the survey concludes that the majority of students show their determination to be honesty while the cheating cases reported are only about the minority of students. In this way, students who involve the survey may have never considered cheating from the very beginning. Furthermore, survey is done when students are not in the environment of a test, thus the result of which is somehow not reliable enough based on the ground that students, even every human, have the tendency to be perfect and cover their defects when interviewed. That is to say, students may say that they are less likely to cheat, but when they finally do their papers, concerning the grade of the course and the effects of it, such as the chances of scholarship, they inevitably take the less-likely side, to cheat, to get higher marks, and, to gain more for the substantial and spiritual. In sum, the survey is not a convincible reason for the institution to adopt the honor codes as it only supply facts that are limited relevant to the honor codes.（好强的一段关于survey的分析，漂亮的连接词。没什么我想改的。学习学习。）
In shrinking（这个用法似乎比较少）, the reasons that stand behind （全文用从句用得好多，是不是有的改为分词形式？） honor codes are arranged by the writer who owns a preference before writing, and consequentially, reasons that seem logical are actually lack of further consideration for the reason that （because）the writer is to sell the idea out. However, before settling down, the writer should gather more details of the cheating rates and take surveys that focus on the cheaters and the comparison of other methods (感觉有点不好懂)( as well as offer an comparison between honor codes and the teacher-monitoring style).

语言和逻辑性都比我的好多了,值得学习!赞一个!

ddcmj519UID: 176326

昂。。因为凑字数为先。。所以别别扭扭的抽了很多个从句，而且写到后面已经不记得前面写过哪些句型了，，所以语法上来说，个人觉得我写得很是混乱。为了追求逻辑&字数。。还是有点抽风的。。。

辛苦楼上同学啦~~谢谢~~:)

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

The argument is organized by offering statistics and a survey to prove that the application of honor codes and notifying suspects has do great moral good. （ do 之后应该跟个宾语吧。。 do sb./sth. good ） It is may seems logical for an institution, who may adopt honor codes, to take the reduction of cheating cases reported and the conclusion of the survey all are the results of the six-year-old legacy.

However, the writer is failing to consider other alternatives that may lead to the decline of cheating cases other than the honor codes. Such alternatives may include that, first of all, in these six years, students’ morality may have improved due to, for instance, the wide use of “honesty record” to make students be aware of the consequences of cheating. Besides, as   there appear   (it appears) hi-tech cheating affairs, I can also say that the decline of reported cheating can also be a result of the development of cheater’s facilities, which are far more advanced than ever   ， enough to allow students to cheat without any difficulty as well as any chance （ chances ，表机会时可数，表意外时不可数） to be noted by others. Even if these are only suggestions, the potential tendency of the statistics still needs to examine. （本句作为攻击点一的总结，结构很完整呢） The sliding of the data in the first year makes us believe that the honor codes did have great effects at the beginning. But years later, as in the recent five years it only shows a relatively low speed of decreasing of all, （个人觉得原文只列举了第六年的数据是多少，并没有告诉我们这期间几年的数据， speed 在此貌似不很合适） simply forgetting some fluctuations during this period that may occur, why can’t we doubt whether the number will drop in the future? It appears to be reasonable to believe that students can adjust to the policy as they gradually find that manipulation can be exerted. Reconsidering the data, we can also find that the author only offers the number of cases reported instead of the cheating rate when the number compare with the amount of students in Groveton. The students’ amount can also reduce during the six years, which a rocketing rate can be suggested to make the cheating rate climb rather than fall. All will lead to the down-going of the cheating cases reported, regardless of the application of honor codes.

Another doubt also arises when we focus on the survey which indicates that students who sign the honor codes are less likely to cheat. However, the survey’s point is on whether to sign will help rather than compare to the old-fashioned style that teacher monitored closely, which can obviously not be taken as a proof of the efficiency of honor codes, as the survey can not tell the differences between the old and the new. （ between the old rules and the new 这整句话看得我郁闷了，我觉得表达有点问题哈，不懂。还是此乃长难句也？不懂。反复看了几遍后，好像有点懂了， Dd 啊你是不是想说，文中的调查着眼于 hornor code 是否有帮助作用而非比较新旧 style 哪个更有效？在纠结了很久并终于貌似看懂了后，我觉得我升华了，阿门。。。） And moreover, the survey concludes that the majority of students show their determination to be honesty while the cheating cases reported are only about the minority of students. In this way, students who involve the survey may have never considered cheating from the very beginning. （此攻击点跟我想得一样，但是你比我表达得好多啦，学习 ing~ ） Furthermore, survey is done when students are not in the environment of a test, thus the result of which is somehow not reliable enough based on the ground that students, even every human, have the tendency to be perfect and cover their defects when interviewed. That is to say, students may say that they are less likely to cheat, but when they finally do their papers, concerning the grade of the course and the effects of it, such as the chances of scholarship, they inevitably take the less-likely side, to cheat, to get higher marks, and, to gain more for the substantial and spiritual （这里是不是该有个宾语。。。） . In sum, the survey is not a convincible reason for the institution to adopt the honor codes as it only supply
（ supplies? ） facts that are limited relevant to the honor codes.

In shrinking （没见过亦没有查到这种表达，不知道正确否） , the reasons that stand behind honor codes are arranged by the writer who owns a preference before writing, and consequentially, reasons that seem logical are actually lack of further consideration for the reason that the writer is to sell the idea out. However, before settling down, the writer should gather more details of the cheating rates and take surveys that focus on the cheaters and the comparison of other methods.( 总结并给出自己的建议，学习 ing~)

－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－整理的分割线－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－－

攻击大点一：质疑数据的真实性
1、
忽略其它导致 case 下降的因素，如：学生素质提高， cheating 手段高明鸟 cheater 不易被发现鸟   
2、
只列举了第一年和最后一年的具体数据，既然如此，随后的几年不一定保持下降趋势。。。   
3、
  Students 基数的改变也可造成 cases 数目的浮动。绝对值与比例的攻击。。。八错。   

攻击大点二：调查的真实性   
1 、 该调查只能说明 majority of students 认为 honor codes 可能会帮助他们，并没有证明新旧 system 哪个更好   
2、
  Cheating 是一种少数人的行为，调查样本缺乏代表性， maybe 正好调查到压根没想过 cheating 的好孩子呢   
3、
调查的进行并非在考试的环境下，无法模拟考试的情况，所以被调查者可能会想当然做成比较有利自己的结果，而真实考试时的情况又有可能不同   

综上，文章的脉络很清晰，总体攻击两个大方向，内部又分别提出了 3 个小的攻击点。楼主的思路我妄自总结如下：   
我先假设你的数据是真实的，但是就没有其它因素造成这种结局么？更何况你的数据并不详尽，并没有详细告诉我们这 6 年来的真实情况，我又怎么预测 6 年之后 cheating 现象的发生情况呢？更何况你的数据还不一定真实呢，你只告诉我们具体的数值，但是没有告诉我们发生率，万一他们学校效益不好缩水了学生基数就少了呢，那你的 cheating 数目是有可能要减少三。再说说调查，我先假设你的调查结果和过程是正确的，但是你的调查结果并没有直接告诉我们新旧 system 哪个更好啊，学生们虽说用了新办法他们更加不太可能作弊，但是并没有说之前的方法对他们是否有效。更何况你的调查虽然调查了大部分学生，但是万一被调查的是从来不作弊的好孩子，他连想都没想过作弊，又咋个比较新旧方法哪个用了他比较不可能作弊呢。更何况这个调查是学生们在不考试的时候进行的，学生们只是在预测自己的行为，而并没有把它放在一种真实的考场环境里，那想当然说的话自然不太可信了。   
  
水平有限，我只改得出这么多了，说是改，不如说是学习，希望还算认真。觉得这篇文逻辑清晰，遣词造句的话我觉得已经很强了，不过我想应该还有很大上升的空间的说，因为我都看得懂的文，貌似语言上不甚高级？呵呵～话说，我改这篇的时间超过了我写自己那篇的时间。呃。。。动作慢啊。。。加油哈，起点高的童鞋啊。。。

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

怎么偶编辑了几次那个英文字母还是那么小满。。。怨念。。。

irvine666UID: 2575525

偶帮你编辑过了，你看看字体合适不

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

7# irvine666
嗯嗯，斑斑好好哦～呵呵～

zzz.321UID: 2600329

The argument is organized by offering statistics and a survey toprove that the application of honor codes and notifying suspects has do great moral good（貌似不对）. It is may seems logical for an institution, who may adopt honorcodes, to take the reduction of cheating cases reported and the conclusion ofthe survey all are the results of the six-year-old legacy.（很新颖，不过我估计暂时是写不来，俄。。）
However, the writer is failing to consider other alternatives thatmay lead to the decline of cheating cases other than the honor codes. Suchalternatives may include that, first of all, in these six years, students’morality may have improved due to, for instance, the wide use of “honestyrecord” to make students be aware of the consequences of cheating. Besides, asthere appear hi-tech cheating affairs, I can also say that the decline ofreported cheating can also be a result of the development of cheater’sfacilities, which are far more advanced than ever ，enough to allow students to cheat without any difficulty as wellas any chance to be noted by others. Even if these are only suggestions, thepotential tendency of the statistics still needs to examine. The sliding of thedata in the first year makes us believe that the honor codes did have greateffects at the beginning. But years later, as in the recent five years it onlyshows a relatively low speed of decreasing of all, simply forgetting somefluctuations during this period that may occur, why can’t we doubt whether thenumber will drop in the future? It appears to be reasonable to believe thatstudents can adjust to the policy as they gradually find that manipulation canbe exerted. Reconsidering the data, we can also find that the author onlyoffers the number of cases reported instead of the cheating rate when thenumber compare with the amount of students in Groveton. The students’ amountcan also reduce during the six years, which a rocketing rate can be suggestedto make the cheating rate climb rather than fall. All will lead to thedown-going of the cheating cases reported, regardless of the application ofhonor codes.段落太长了吧。。
Another doubt also arises when we focus on the survey whichindicates that students who sign the honor codes are less likely to cheat.However, the survey’s point is on whether to sign will help rather than compareto the old-fashioned style that teacher monitored closely, which can obviouslynot be taken as a proof of the efficiency of honor codes, as the survey can nottell the differences between the old and the new. And moreover, the surveyconcludes that the majority of students show their determination to be honestywhile the cheating cases reported are only about the minority of students. Inthis way, students who involve the survey may have never considered cheatingfrom the very beginning. Furthermore, survey is done when students are not inthe environment of a test, thus the result of which is somehow not reliableenough based on the ground that students, even every human, have the tendencyto be perfect and cover their defects when interviewed. That is to say,students may say that they are less likely to cheat, but when they finally dotheir papers, concerning the grade of the course and the effects of it, such asthe chances of scholarship, they inevitably take the less-likely side, tocheat, to get higher marks, and, to gain more for the substantial andspiritual. In sum, the survey is not a convincible reason for the institutionto adopt the honor codes as it only supply facts that are limited relevant tothe honor codes.
In shrinking什么意思, the reasons that stand behindhonor codes are arranged by the writer who owns a preference before writing,and consequentially, reasons that seem logical are actually lack of furtherconsideration for the reason that the writer is to sell the idea out. However,before settling down, the writer should gather more details of the cheatingrates and take surveys that focus on the cheaters and the comparison of othermethods.

感觉应该分三四点比较好吧，两大点里应该可以分出一些来，要不段落感觉太长了，纯属个人感觉。

Ps：文章写的很好啊，尤其是连词和从句真是出神入化，境界比我高多了，我也改不出什么来，膜拜。。

ddcmj519UID: 176326

嗷嗷~谢谢大家帮偶改改~~thx again~
I really appreciate it~~