累死了，写个argu怎么这么累，折腾了50分钟，argu22题，求拍，求赐教

zhanghaolin

22. According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, 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 a system in which teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.

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

In the argument, the author recommends that all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating. To support the recommendation, the author cites the following as evidence: (1) the number of cheating in Groveton has reduced largely since the code was in place; (2) a survey says that Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place. The argument seems to be well-presented and reasonable at first glance; however, I am afraid it can hardly bear further consideration because the evidence might have multiple explanations, which makes the argument unpersuasive.

First and foremost, the specific number about the cheating in Groveton after the code was in place is doubtful because the method defined in the code might leads to an inaccurate result. First, after the code was in place, cheating has being reported based on 'suspicion' but not 'evidence', which might result that some innocent students are treated as cheaters inequitably while real cheaters escape being punished at the same time. What is more, comparing to the flaw listed above, the following one is more serious: since cheating is a secret action and always unnoticeable unless noticed by close friends, it is quite unbelievable that close friends will report the cheating regardless of the risk of ending the friendship, which means there might exist a set number of cheating unexposed. In that case the data cannot be a convincible evidence to show the advantage of code system. So, the author should make investigation to assure that the data can be trusted before using it in hasty.

Furthermore, the result of the recent survey can hardly be a reliable proof. Since when being asked for questions related with morality such as willing to cheating or skipping class, to response with positive answer is more likely a provocation (defiant) to rules and regulations, it is normal and understandable for a student to tend to make the moral choice no matter whether the answer reveals his or her real thoughts or just a method to maintain face. So, result of such a survey cannot be convincible evidence to support the fact that less people have the willing to cheat than before.

Last but not the least, even though the data cited in the argument is correct, the author only mentions the advantages of the code while ignores to take account of the side effects. Apparently, implementing such a new system will inevitable intense the mistrust between students, not to mention it will encourage the winds of snitches or used by some students to calumniate others. For a college which main purpose of education is to cultivate upright, honest citizen, using such a system might have an opposite effect even though its initial aim is to stop cheating and encourage honesty. The author should take account of such risks before making a recommendation.

To sum up, after pointing out so many obvious flaws in the argument, we can say that the evidence cited by the author can hardly be relied on. Before reaching a final conclusion and making the recommendation, the author should make comprehensive investigation to confirm the effectiveness of the code and take account of its side effects.

普渡哥

模板痕迹太明显。

竹林中人

如果LZ摆脱模板，自己组织效果会更好，你自己的分析还是很不错的

zhanghaolin

首先感谢两位版主的费时阅读并作出评价。我也想不用模板，但是问题是语言组织太费力，尤其像首段和末段，不用模板的话要花好长时间。恳请指点迷津。

竹林中人

首先感谢两位版主的费时阅读并作出评价。我也想不用模板，但是问题是语言组织太费力，尤其像首段和末段，不用模板的话要花好长时间。恳请指点迷津。

-- by 会员 zhanghaolin (2012/10/30 10:04:30)

自己写的再怎么差不会比套模板差，因为模板千篇一律，只会降低对你文章的好看，而自己写的只要不要太离谱语言错误不太多，就不错了