- UID
- 726889
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-2-24
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
TOPIC: ARGUMENT193 - The Department ofEducation in the state of Attra recommends that high school students beassigned homework every day. Yet a recent statewide survey of high school mathand science teachers calls the usefulness of daily homework into question. Inthe district of Sanlee, 86 percent of the teachers reported assigning homeworkthree to five times a week, whereas in the district of Marlee, less than 25percent of the teachers reported assigning homework three to five times a week.Yet the students in Marlee earn better grades overall and are less likely to berequired to repeat a year of school than are the students in Sanlee. Therefore,all teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice aweek, if at all.
WORDS: 610 TIME: 00:45:00 DATE: 2012/9/13 21:47:54
提纲：
1。调查是否具有代表性，且只调查了math和science两门课 不具有说服力
2。布置作业频率与成绩和repeat时间是否有直接因果关系，事实上是作业总量对学生有影响而非频率
3。两地区情况不同不能作类比，减小作业频率是否有负面效应
Merely based upon false assumption anddubious evidence, the argument draws a conclusion that the homework in highschools should be assigned no more than twice a week. To justify the argument,the arguer points out evidence that a recent nationwide survey of high schoolmath and science teachers put the usefulness of daily homework recommended bythe Department of Education into concern. The arguer provides detailedstatistics of the teachers reporting the frequency of the homework of twodifferent districts, and claims that the students with less frequent homeworkare likely to get better grades. However, close scrutiny of the argumentreveals that it is problematic in several aspects.
First and foremost, the arguer fails totestify whether the survey is representative enough to prove the argument to betrue. There is no detailed information of the individuals participated in thesurvey to show that they are representative. In addition, even if the samplesof the survey are representative, the survey only covers math and science,which renders the results of it more suspicious. It is mostly resulted fromthat the arguer unfairly assumes that the rest of the subjects are similar tomath and science. It is entirely possible that math and science are difficultand complicated, which adds too much pressure on the students and leave them notime to review, and thus influence the grades of the coursed. Without rulingout other subjects into consideration, the argument will remain invalid.
Moreover, even if the survey is showed tobe reliable enough, the arguer base the conclusion on a false observationbetween the frequency of the homework and the grades of the students. Commonsense tells us that it is, most of the time, the total amount of the homeworkrather that the frequency that has an effect on the grades of students' study.The arguer also unfairly and arbitrarily set the grades and whether thestudents are required to repeat a year as the indicator of the educationquality in one district. For example, the academic research and experiments insome fields could be selected as the indicator of the education quality whenproceeding a comparison between districts. Whereas, none of the above factorsare explained, which again renders the conclusion unconvincing.
Finally, even if the above reasons andclaim are proved to valid and sufficient, the arguer set a false analogybetween the two districts, Sanlee and Marlee. The arguer falsely assumes thatthe students and teachers of the two districts are at the same level, which isnot reliable whatsoever. Numerous factors could contribute to the differencesbetween the two districts, for example, the students are learning course ofvarious difficulties, thus makes the homework varies in difficulty and thefrequency is adjusted for it. One thing that is most crucial to the conclusionand possible measure followed is that the arguer fails to consider the negativeeffects, such as, students devote more time to pleasure than school courses.Without coming up a rational explanation of above questions, the argument couldbe hardly logically efficient.
To sum up, the arguer fails to substantiatethe reliability of the survey including the samples and the objectives, andthus the evidence lends little support for the conclusion. To make the conclusionconvincing and valid, the arguer would have to demonstrate that the grades andthe time students are required to repeat could be regarded as the indicator ofthe education quality. Additionally, he would have to testify that this methodhas positive effects and the situations of the two districts are equal.Therefore, with the above issues demonstrated and explained, the argument couldbe sufficient and reliable. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-9-13 23:10:22
收藏
收藏
楼主
