[YB1]七月8日作业 by 644

liusisi644644UID: 2573256

5. "A nation should require all its students to study the same national
curriculum until they enter college rather than allow schools in different
parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer."
一个国家应该要求所有的学生在进入大学之前都学习由国家统一制定的课程，而不是允许由国家不同地区的学校去决定课程的安排。
国家统一和地区单独安排课程


总论点：不同意
分论点：
1.地区的差异：
民族文化的保持；地方历史、地理有利于增加对家乡的了解和热爱；爱尔兰：有自己语言能加分容易获得奖学金。
2.完全相同一种文化不利于思想的发展。
假设如果总教授同一套课程，人们对事物是非的判断力就会减弱，最终不利于发展；e,g.各种学生的参与：体育生 ，艺术生，美术生。从人的观点出发。如何让学生学到最重要的知识。
3.partly agree: 国家的教程有其好的一面，适用性强。内容广泛。//有众多的
优秀老师参与编写。地区的教程也有起好的一面。//比如小语种。双语教学。
结论：地区应该综合国家的教程和地区特色。应该根据不同地区的特点，允许其选择更合适的教材，甚至同一地区都可以根据需要有不同的教材。


The speaker holds the view that a nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. I partly disagree on it, because the speaker ignores many practical factors.

First of all, the primary problem is that not all the areas have the capacity to arrange proceeded curriculums for the students because the economics of these areas, in reality, are not standing at a same level compared with others. We cannot acquire the educational systems or governments in which is poor live standard to do the same lessons for their local residents’ children as the developed areas, in which the conditions is enough good to carry a higher curriculum out for students. It’s due to the objective qualifications not to the governments or education systems’ subjective willingness.

Secondly, every area has its own traditions, cultures and customs, even though in the same country, which also are very different in each region. Obviously, it will lose many advantages that brought out by their own cultures if all the student of a nation studied a same curriculum. By doing a so stupid policy, the natives’ ethnic flavor would not existed anymore and the students’ respect and passion to their nations would be abated, not mentioned to realize their ancestors’ particular cultures an history completely. On the other country, in order to remain their proper culture, for example, in Ireland, the government adopts lots of measures to encourage students to learn Irish, and who hold this could be easier to acquire the scholarship when he or she entered the college. In shortly, allowing schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer is an excellent basis for keeping ethnic flavors.


Furthermore, a uniform model of education is not good for initiative of students, especially in the sphere of setting a program, and cooperation with peers in some particular experiments. That is to say, it will kill the children’s gifts that the God had put into their mind. “The most important part of education,” said by William Ernest Hocking, the distinguished Harvard philosopher “is this instruction of a man in what he has inside him.” To put a uniform model of education into practice, it has to be murdered about the instructions of students’ mind. What worth be mentioned is that china education system admit all kinds of students to enter the university, for instance, thanks to different education in different areas, athletes, painters, singers, dancers and so forth, which are all accepted by college.

However, disagreeing to uniform the model of education is not means that we will ignores the advantages of common lessons. As everyone knows, the national government has absolute rights to gather all best experts, professors, educators and teachers to edit a series of common book for students, and it is more authoritative, efficient and widely. In other words, the policy made by national government is not put aside because we could draw out the perspective from these right measures.

In sum, to require all the students to study the same national curriculum is not improper and unadvisable. Just like the Chinese old saying goes: teach students according to their aptitude. The education is connected both with political situation and economic development, and we should consider all elements about it by colligating the national curriculum and regional flavors.



7The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

1.
Ann Green 是Good Earth Coalition

的成员 不一定就能做好保护环境的工作，政府的工作很复杂，跟在Good Earth Coalition工作的情况不一样，需要各部门的协调能力，作者没有给出证据证明这点。我没有充分的理由去选他。
2.
Frank Braun是town council

的成员，作者举例子说明工厂成倍增加，造成环境污染，导致空气污染，很多人的了呼吸道的病。例子有很大的问题。首先没有例子说明工厂的增加是由于Frank Braun

的错误政策，其次，空气污染不一定是工厂带来的，可能是隔壁城市飘来的，或者是其他原因造成的。第三，呼吸道疾病的增加不是一定是空气污染导致的，可能是流行病的突然爆发。例子存在漏洞，不能证明Frank Braun没有保护环境的能力与决心。
3.
让步，就算是污染了。但责任也不一定是他的。很有可能他采取了保护措施，但由于是town council里别人的错误决策导致了污染。

The arguer claims that if we voted the Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will be solved. I am not persuaded by this argument because of several logical errors made by arguer.

The primarily logical mistake is that Ann Green is a member of Good Earth Coalition so that arguer regard he is the better person who will concentrate on protecting the environment. Obviously, there is no evidence listed to prove Ann Green is an environmental protector. The argument didn’t point out the measures about protecting environment put into practice by Ann Green when he was in their tenure office.
It is ill-considered to deduce Ann Green is suited the position of mayor just because he is a member of Good Earth Coalition, and I can’t accept it.


Secondly, the arguer holds a aptly illustration to prove Frank Braun is not matched to be a mayor because he hasn’t the capacity to protect the city’s environment. Let’s examine the illustrate carefully, and you’ll find several spot that undermine the reliability of the illustrate. It is a pity to draw out that arguer doesn’t give any proof which could explain the increased number of industry is due to the wrong policy made by Frank Braun. At the same time, the arguer doesn’t give any details about the air pollution. It is entirely that the air pollution is caused by dirty air flowed from neighbor city industries.




很明显 我没写完 ·先发了再说 ·见谅 ·

wangerdaiUID: 2586666

argument观点出来也基本差不多咯

wangerdaiUID: 2586666

The speaker holds the view that a nation should require all its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. I partly disagree on it, because the speaker ignores many practical factors.
First of all, the primary problem is that not all the areas have the capacity to arrange proceeded curriculums for the students because the economics of these areas, in reality, are not standing at a same level compared with others. We cannot acquire the educational systems or governments in which is poor live standard to do the same lessons for their local residents’ children as the developed areas, in which the conditions is good enough to carry a higher curriculum out for students. It’s due to the objective qualifications not to the governments or education systems’ subjective willingness.
Secondly, every area has its own traditions, cultures and customs, even though in the same country, which also are very different in each region. Obviously, it will lose many advantages that brought out by their own cultures if all the student of a nation studied a same curriculum. By doing a so stupid policy, the natives’ ethnic flavor would not existed anymore and the students’ respect and passion to their nations would be abated, not mentioned to realize their ancestors’ particular cultures an history completely. On the other country, in order to remain their proper culture, for example, in Ireland, the government adopts lots of measures to encourage students to learn Irish, and who hold this could be easier to acquire the scholarship when he or she entered the college. In shortly, allowing schools in different parts of the nation to determine which academic courses to offer is an excellent basis for keeping ethnic flavors.


Furthermore, a uniform model of education is not good for initiative of students, especially in the sphere of setting a program, and cooperation with peers in some particular experiments. That is to say, it will kill the children’s gifts that the God had put into their mind. “The most important part of education,” said by William Ernest Hocking, the distinguished Harvard philosopher “is this instruction of a man in what he has inside him.” To put a uniform model of education into practice, it has to be murdered about the instructions of students’ mind. What worth be mentioned is that Chinese education system admit all kinds of students to enter the university, for instance, thanks to different education in different areas, athletes, painters, singers, dancers and so forth, which are all accepted by college.
However, disagreeing on uniform the model of education does not mean that we will ignore the advantages of common lessons. As everyone knows, the national government has absolute rights to gather all best experts, professors, educators and teachers to edit a series of common book for students, and it is more authoritative, efficient and widely. In another word, the policy made by national government is not put aside because we could draw out the perspective from these right measures.
In sum, to require all the students to study the same national curriculum is not improper and unadvisable. Just like the Chinese old saying goes: teach students according to their aptitude. The education is connected both with political situation and economic development, and we should consider all elements about it by colligating the national curriculum and regional flavors.

觉得你应该找了不少资料啵，好多old saying啊，不过我觉得好像你的简单句好多啊，貌似长句子比较流行哈。

liusisi644644UID: 2573256

兄弟  您能把改的用颜色标记不 ～我看得眼都花了～～～ 3# wangerdai