【简介】感谢网友“雕龙文库”参与投稿，这里小编给大家分享一些，方便大家学习。
为了方便广大考生更好的复习，综合整理了GMAT作文：Argument范文精选系列文章，以供各位考生考试复习参考,希望对考生复习有所帮助。
This speaker draws the conclusion that there is no need to substantially increase funding for Einstein High School. To support this conclusion, the speaker claims that Einstein has improved its educational efficiency over the past 20 years, even though funding level s have remained relatively constant. His evidence is that two-thirds of Einsteins graduates now go on to college, whereas 20 years ago only half of its students did so. This argument suffers from several critical problems.
To begin with, we must establish the meaning of the vague concept educational efficiency. If the term is synonymous with the rate of graduation to college, then the statistics cited would strongly support the argument. But, normally we are interested in something more than just the numbers of students who go on to college from a high school; we also want to know how well the school has prepared students for a successful college experiencethat is, whether the school has provided a good secondary education. Thus, for the speaker the term educational efficiency must essentially carry the same meaning as educational quality.
Given this clarification, one of the speakers assumptions is that the rate of graduation to college has increased because Einstein is doing a better job of educating its students. However, the fact that more Einstein graduates now go on to college might simply reflect a general trend. And the general trend might have less to do with improved secondary education than with the reality that a college degree is now the standard of entry into most desirable jobs.
But even if the quality of education at Einstein had improved, would this be a compelling reason to deny Einstein additional funding? I dont think so. It is possible that the school has managed to deliver better education in spite of meager funding. Teachers may be dipping into their own pockets for supplies and other resources necessary for doing their job well. Perhaps the quality of education at Einstein would improve even more with additional financial support.
In sum, this argument does not establish the conclusion that additional funding for Einstein is unnecessary. To do so, the speaker would have to provide evidence that the quality of education at Einstein has improved. This could be done by examining student assessment scores or by tracking students through their college careers to see how many successfully graduate and find jobs. In addition, the speaker would also have to show that Einstein is doing a good job with adequate financial support, and not merely in spite of insufficient funding.
小编提醒：考生们可在日常生活中多读范文，多练笔，培养出好的语感和逻辑，这样才能在考试中写出优秀的作文。
为了方便广大考生更好的复习，综合整理了GMAT作文：Argument范文精选系列文章，以供各位考生考试复习参考,希望对考生复习有所帮助。
This speaker draws the conclusion that there is no need to substantially increase funding for Einstein High School. To support this conclusion, the speaker claims that Einstein has improved its educational efficiency over the past 20 years, even though funding level s have remained relatively constant. His evidence is that two-thirds of Einsteins graduates now go on to college, whereas 20 years ago only half of its students did so. This argument suffers from several critical problems.
To begin with, we must establish the meaning of the vague concept educational efficiency. If the term is synonymous with the rate of graduation to college, then the statistics cited would strongly support the argument. But, normally we are interested in something more than just the numbers of students who go on to college from a high school; we also want to know how well the school has prepared students for a successful college experiencethat is, whether the school has provided a good secondary education. Thus, for the speaker the term educational efficiency must essentially carry the same meaning as educational quality.
Given this clarification, one of the speakers assumptions is that the rate of graduation to college has increased because Einstein is doing a better job of educating its students. However, the fact that more Einstein graduates now go on to college might simply reflect a general trend. And the general trend might have less to do with improved secondary education than with the reality that a college degree is now the standard of entry into most desirable jobs.
But even if the quality of education at Einstein had improved, would this be a compelling reason to deny Einstein additional funding? I dont think so. It is possible that the school has managed to deliver better education in spite of meager funding. Teachers may be dipping into their own pockets for supplies and other resources necessary for doing their job well. Perhaps the quality of education at Einstein would improve even more with additional financial support.
In sum, this argument does not establish the conclusion that additional funding for Einstein is unnecessary. To do so, the speaker would have to provide evidence that the quality of education at Einstein has improved. This could be done by examining student assessment scores or by tracking students through their college careers to see how many successfully graduate and find jobs. In addition, the speaker would also have to show that Einstein is doing a good job with adequate financial support, and not merely in spite of insufficient funding.
小编提醒：考生们可在日常生活中多读范文，多练笔，培养出好的语感和逻辑，这样才能在考试中写出优秀的作文。
