[作文互改] Arguement 74 求拍

74. The president of Grove College has recommended that thecollege abandon its century-old tradition of all-female education and beginadmitting men. Pointing to other all-female colleges that experienced anincrease in applications after adopting coeducation, the president argues thatcoeducation would lead to a significant increase in applications andenrollment. However, the director of the alumnae association opposes the plan.Arguing that all-female education is essential to the very identity of thecollege, the director cites annual surveys of incoming students in which thesestudents say that the school's all-female status was the primary reason theyselected Grove. The director also points to a survey of Grove alumnae in whicha majority of respondents strongly favored keeping the college all female.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions wouldneed to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and theargument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how theanswers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

This argument tried to discuss if CroveCollege should abandon its century-old tradition of all-female education, whichadvocates opposing voices. Although the grounds of arguments might seemreasonable at the first glance, the are in fact ill-conceived from bothsupporting and opposing sides.

Taking the supportive side, the presidentassumes that admitting men in to the college would lead to significant increasein applications and enrollment, using the case for other all-female colleges asevidence. Although it might be entirely possible, this argument is rife withholes and overlook of comparability between individuals. On one hand, it isquestionable if Crove College can copy the success of other all-femalecolleges. It could be plenty of other reasons for their achievements, fromlocation, facility to reputation and offering subjects. This makes drawingconclusion based on only simple comparison relatively irrational. On the otherhand, the president failed to discuss about the applicability of co-educationand the potential problems of enrolling men. It is very likely that newsubjects suit and interest men have to be added. The budget, personal and otherrelated problems were however, neglect. Besides, new facilities are alsorequired, such as separate toilette, changing room in the teaching area and theseparated dormitory. Possibility and timing of these issues were also notcovered in the arguments. Moreover, how does men influence the female students?Would they also be accepted the professors and administrations? These questionshave to be answered before making the decision. To summarize briefly, thepresident's reasoning is definitely flawed unless proving that these and otherpossible scenarios are highly unlikely.

In the opposing camp, the director of thealumnae association opposed the plan, which also based on assumptions and flawed logics. The twosurveys used as supportive evidences both have their doubtful aspects. First ofall, if all-female education is essential identity to the university is notsolid. Keeping tradition does not mean staying on the same track forever. Theconcept of university shifts with the development of human society over the lastcenturies and decades. Staying unchanged to some extend, obeys the idea ofuniversity and education. Moreover, it is also unclear if the surveys of incomingstudents and the alumnae represent majority’s opinion. To carry out a trustworth survey, the following factors have to be considered and well controlled:coverage bias, wording of questions as well as response/nonresponse bias allbring in potential inaccuracy in the polls. Incoming students cannot well coverall the potential perspective students. It is possible that more perspectivestudents did not choose Grove College because of its all-female education. Inother words, the college could have attracted more students by changing intoco-education system. Also, interpretation of this survey is questionableconcerning the accurate percentage of the sample students who chose Grove forits all-female status. Finally, the survey in the alumnae cannot be fullytrusted. The director pointed to the respondents’ opinion but totallyoverlooked the opinion of the non-respondents. It is common sense that raisingvoice to say “abandon” the tradition can be hard and required great encourage,leading that not many would like to express their true opinion. Thus, withoutaccounting for and ruling out these and other alternatives, the director cannotbolster the opposing opinion against the co-education.

To sum up, the both arguers’ arguments werenot based on valid evidence or sound reasoning, neither of which is dispensablefor a conclusive argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, more solidevinces should be presented and more logical reasoning should be conveyed. Examiningall the various angles and factors of co-education should be required towarrant any decision and action.