The following appeared in an article in a college departmental newsletter
Professor Taylor of Jones University is promoting a model of foreign language instruction in which students receive ten weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for ten weeks. The superiority of the model, Professor Taylor contends, is proved by the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only ten to twenty weeks in the program than do nine out of ten foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
This newsletter article claims that Professor Taylors foreign-language program at Jones University is a model of foreign language instruction. This conclusion is based on a study in which foreign language tests were given to students at 25 other universities. The study shows that first-year language students at Jones speak more fluently after just 10 to 20 weeks in the program than do 90 percent of foreign-language majors at other colleges at graduation. Despite these impressive statistics, I am unconvinced by this argument for two reasons.
To begin with, the assumption here is that students from Professor Taylors program have learned more than foreign language students at other universities. However, we are not given enough information about the study to be sure that this comparison is reliable. For example, the article does not tell us whether the foreign language students at Jones were given the tests; it only reports that the tests in question were given to students at 25 other colleges. If Jones students were not tested, then no basis exists for comparing them to students at the other universities. In addition, the article does not indicate whether students at all the universities, including Jones, were given the same tests. If not, then again no basis exists for the comparison.
Furthermore, we cannot tell from this article whether the universities in the study, or their students, are comparable in other ways. For instance, Jones might be a prestigious university that draws its students from the top echelon of high school graduates, while the other universities are lower-ranked schools with more lenient admission requirements. In this event, the study wouldnt tell us much about Professor Taylors program, for the proficiency of his students might be a function of their superior talent and intelligence.
In conclusion, the statistics cited in the article offer little support for the claim about Taylors program. To strengthen the argument, the author must show that the universities in the study, including Jones, were comparable in other ways, that their foreign language students were tested identically, and that Taylors program was the only important difference between students tested at Jones and those tested at the other universities.
上一篇: 精选GMAT写作范文50篇(17)
下一篇: 精选GMAT写作范文50篇(6)
看过老友记的花絮吗?
Obama needs to tread carefully in Chicago strike
大自然的召唤,关于洗手间的英文
Isaac nears New Orleans on Katrina anniversary
Romney sticks to Obama songbook on China
Mining company blamed for blast
5 soldiers killed in Afghanistan
Obama hit with friendly fire
Students going abroad struggle with new culture
Authorities probe cause of brush fire near LA
Japan holds talks with DPRK
如何形容型男的身材?
Pound backs Armstrong decision
Producers see red over 'wine subsidies'
Heat vs Clippers tickets to go on sale
Van Persie off to United
Pakistani bomber strikes US vehicle
11 tried over sale of gutter oil
Washington to remain focused on Asia-Pacific
First Lady first up as Democrats try to break deadlock
Youku Tudou outlines vision for merged company
Prices make feathers fly for Angry Birds' merchandise
Clinton to discuss wide range of issues during China visit
Tablet makers diversify to tackle Apple
China helps bust US drug websites
Emotions and feelings idioms
Air China flight returns to Beijing over false threat
Drivers at fault in tragic accident
Colors of the Life
No stage fright?