GRE寫作官方題庫高頻ARGUMENT題目滿分范文分享：the usefulness of frequent homework assignments

　　The data from a survey of high school math and science teachers show that in the district of Sanlee many of these teachers reported assigning daily homework, whereas in the district of Marlee, most science and math teachers reported assigning homework no more than two or three days per week. Despite receiving less frequent homework assignments, Marlee students earn better grades overall and are less likely to be required to repeat a year of school than are students in Sanlee. These results call into question the usefulness of frequent homework assignments. Most likely the Marlee students have more time to concentrate on individual assignments than do the Sanlee students who have homework every day. Therefore teachers in our high schools should assign homework no more than twice a week.

　　Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

　　滿分范文賞析

　　The speaker argues that if the state board of education reduced the frequency of homework assigned, performance overall would improve. To support this assertion the speaker cites a statewide survey of math and science teachers. According to the survey, students in the Marlee district, who are assigned homework no more than once per week, achieve better grades and are less likely to repeat a school year than students in the Sanlee district, who are assigned homework every night. The evidence presented provides little credible support for the speaker's assertion.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument開頭段結構，即：C – E - F的開頭結構，首句概括原文的C(Conclusion)。接下來的一句話概括了原文為了支持他的結論所引用的E(Evidence)。最后尾句中給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文在邏輯上存在F(Flaw)。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在發(fā)起攻擊。首先，概括原文的結論：如果state board減少留作業(yè)的頻率，學生表現(xiàn)會提高。接下來分別列舉了原文為了支持這個結論引用的證據(jù)：一個在關于math和science teacher的全州調查。一周兩次作業(yè)Marlee(以后簡稱M)區(qū)比每天都有作業(yè)Sanlee(以后簡稱S)區(qū)成績和合格率要高。論據(jù)的歸納用于鋪墊出正文段的具體攻擊。最后點出原文存在邏輯錯誤，引出后面的分析。

　　To begin with, the survey suffers from two statistical issues, either of which renders the survey's results unreliable. First, the speaker relies on statistics from only two districts but it is entirely possible that these two districts are not representative of the state's school districts overall. Second, the survey involved only math and science teachers. Yet the speaker draws a broad recommendation for all teachers based on the survey's results.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第一個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第一段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：調查類錯誤。作者認為原文所引用的調查在調查對象數(shù)量上和質量上都存在問題。首先，只有兩個district，很可能不representative。其次，調查只包括 math and science teachers，而建議中提到的是all teacher，所以不合理。

　　Additionally, the speaker's recommendation relies on the assumption that the amount of homework assigned to students is the only possible reason for the comparative academic performance between students in the two districts. Perhaps there are other reasons. For example, maybe Sanlee teachers are stricter graders then Marlee teachers. Or perhaps Sanlee teachers are less effective than Marlee teachers, and therefore Sanlee students would perform more poorly regardless of homework schedule. In short, in order to properly conclude that fewer homework assignments results in better academic performance, the speaker must first rule out all other possible explanations for the disparity in academic performance between the two districts.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第二個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第二段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：因果類錯誤。原文中建議在“作業(yè)量是影響學生表現(xiàn)的唯一原因”的基礎上提出的。而作者認為可能會有其他影響學習表現(xiàn)的原因。例如，S區(qū)的老師比M取得嚴格導致S區(qū)學生表現(xiàn)不如M區(qū)，或是S區(qū)的學生在homework schedule下perform more poorly。最后，作者提出必須排除其他因素的影響才能下結論。