該文章脈絡(luò)清晰,論述全面辯證。首先,作者闡述一方觀點(diǎn):所有的孩子可以通過(guò)教育學(xué)到技能,并以教育理念和校園經(jīng)歷加以論證。其次,論述另一方觀點(diǎn)的合理性:是否具有天賦將普通人和天才區(qū)分開(kāi)來(lái),換而言之,天賦是沒(méi)有辦法教會(huì)的。最后,作者提出自己的觀點(diǎn):兩者不可或缺——后天訓(xùn)練幫助孩子學(xué)到技能,天賦讓孩子出類拔萃。
附上范文全文,請(qǐng)小伙伴們仔細(xì)閱讀,特別要注意看文章的篇章結(jié)構(gòu)和語(yǔ)言表達(dá)。
The relative importance of natural talent and training is a frequent topic of discussion when people try to explain different levels of ability in, for example, sport, art or music.
Obviously, education systems are based on the belief that all children can effectively be taught to acquire different skills, including those associated withsport, art or music. So from our own school experience, we can find plenty of evidence to support the view that a child can acquire these skills with continued teaching and guided practice.
However, some people believe that innate talent is what differentiates a person who has been trained to play a sport or an instrument, from those who become good players. In other words, there is more to the skill than a learned technique, and this extra talent cannot be taught, no matter how good the teacher or how frequently a child practices.
I personally think that some people do have talents that are probablyinherited via their genes. Such talents can give individuals a facility for certain skills that allow them to excel, while more hard-working students never manage to reach a comparable level. But, as with all questions of nature versus nurture, they are not mutually exclusive. Good musicians or artists andexceptional sports stars have probably succeeded because of both good training and natural talent. Without the natural talent, continuous training would be neither attractive nor productive, and without the training, the child would not learn how to exploit and develop their talent.
In conclusion, I agree that any child can be taught particular skills, but to be really good in areas such as music, art or sport, then some natural talent is required.
(281 words)