标题: FF逻辑 59 [打印本页] 作者: clumsy123 时间: 2011-4-9 22:22 标题: FF逻辑 59 59. Top college graduatesare having more difficulty demonstrating their superiority to prospective employersthan did the top students of twenty years ago when an honors degree wasdistinction enough. Today’s employers are less impressed with the honorsdegree. Twenty years ago no more than 10 percent of a given class graduatedwith honors. Today, however, because of grade inflation, the honors degree goesto more than 50 percent of a graduating class. Therefore, to restore confidencein the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation. Which one of thefollowing is an assumption that, if true, would support the conclusion in thepassage? (A)Today’s students are not higher achievers than the students of twenty yearsago. (B) Awarding too many honors degrees causes collegesto inflate grades. (C) Today’semployers rely on honors ranking in making their hiring decisions. (D) It is not easyfor students with low grades to obtain jobs. (E) Colleges must makeemployers aware of the criteria used to determine who receives an honor degree.
所以A里面就是这个假设 not higher achiever than the students of twenty years ago 取非,如果现在更多人是因为很牛获得的honor degree,那么就不是grade inflation 影响的百分之五十了,从而推翻了to restore confindece...,we must control grade inflation作者: clumsy123 时间: 2011-4-9 23:46
恩,所以说控制分数=控制得到honor degree的人数=要减少honor degree的人数,那么assumption就要和 减少honor degree的人数 有关 对么?作者: sorcerer 时间: 2011-4-10 09:30
LZ好像还是没有理解清楚这个argument的意思 而且这个等式比较绕,把问题复杂化了 控制分数是这个argument最后的建议 建议必然要建立在一个结论上 结论必然要有假设
这个的重点不是在要不要减少honor degree上, 而是对honor degree增加的原因产生了分歧 原文认为增加的太多,实际有能力的没这么多人,所以是分数导致的 那他必须假设现在的人不是因为提高能力才获得的honor degree 这个逻辑很直接啊 lz不要找link就列等式把问题想复杂了哈作者: clumsy123 时间: 2011-4-10 22:02
额~Therefore, to restore confidencein the degrees they award, colleges must take steps to control grade inflation.那这句话不是文章的结论么~~结论不是文章的重点么~~~这么说的我有点晕了啊!我如何知道文章的重点是啥呢?