|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
15 Sep 2015, 08:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
"Two years ago Nova High School began to use interactive computer instruction in three academic subjects.
The school dropout rate declined immediately, and last year's graduates have reported some impressive achievements in college. In future budgets the school board should use a greater portion of the available funds to buy more computers, and all schools in the district should adopt interactive computer instruction throughout the
curriculum."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
The excerpt is from a newspaper editorial that cites evidence of usage of interactive computer instruction in Nova High School that it claims helped reduce the school's dropout rate and aided the students in their achievements. It uses this evidence to wrongly claim that in future the school board should allocate greater percentage of funds for buying computers and that schools should adopt interactive computer instruction throughout their curriculum. Due to insufficient reasoning and faulty assumptions made by the editorial, it fails to convince us.
Firstly, correlation doesn't imply causality and just because the achievements of the students occurred a year after the inclusion of computer instructions is not enough to prove that it was the cause of this improved performance. It is quite possible that different students have different capabilities and would have performed better with or without the use of such technology.
Secondly,the editorial makes no mention at all of which three academic subjects the computer instruction was provided in. It also ambiguously claims the dropout rate declined. However, had the editorial described which subjects the instruction was provided in as well as provided subject specific data related to the decrease in dropout rates, we might have been able to establish some amount of correlation between the two although even then, such evidence would not have been enough to establish causality. It also ambiguously claims last years college graduates have made impressive achievements in college. There is no mention of which fields this achievements have been made in, as well as whether there has been an increase in the frequency of these achievements from the prior year. As a result, we are also not able to establish any correlation between the use of computer instructions and these achievements.
Thirdly, even if we do assume that the provision of computer instruction in three subjects did improve student performances, such evidence on its own does not warrant the conclusion that computer instruction must be utilized throughout the curriculum. It is quite possible that students respond positively to computer instruction in Mathematics, whereas subjects such as Geography and Political Science require the vital discussions between the teacher and other students to enhance understanding, which cannot be provided by a digital medium.
Finally, even if we incorrectly assume that the usage of computer instruction did prove beneficial to the students of Nova High School, such evidence is not enough to conclude that it would benefit students from all schools in the district equally. It is quite possible that students of other schools in the district are not as technologically capable and computer literate as students of Nova High School and don't respond well to the usage of such instruction. It is equally possible that other schools lack the funding to invest in such technology without compromising on other utilities.
Thus, the argument is flawed for the wide variety of reasons provided above. It is quite possible that allocating more budget to computers in the future does prove beneficial to students, but the editorial must provide more subject wise data related to the instruction and dropout rate to support its claims.
The school dropout rate declined immediately, and last year's graduates have reported some impressive achievements in college. In future budgets the school board should use a greater portion of the available funds to buy more computers, and all schools in the district should adopt interactive computer instruction throughout the
curriculum."
Discuss how well reasoned ... etc.
The excerpt is from a newspaper editorial that cites evidence of usage of interactive computer instruction in Nova High School that it claims helped reduce the school's dropout rate and aided the students in their achievements. It uses this evidence to wrongly claim that in future the school board should allocate greater percentage of funds for buying computers and that schools should adopt interactive computer instruction throughout their curriculum. Due to insufficient reasoning and faulty assumptions made by the editorial, it fails to convince us.
Firstly, correlation doesn't imply causality and just because the achievements of the students occurred a year after the inclusion of computer instructions is not enough to prove that it was the cause of this improved performance. It is quite possible that different students have different capabilities and would have performed better with or without the use of such technology.
Secondly,the editorial makes no mention at all of which three academic subjects the computer instruction was provided in. It also ambiguously claims the dropout rate declined. However, had the editorial described which subjects the instruction was provided in as well as provided subject specific data related to the decrease in dropout rates, we might have been able to establish some amount of correlation between the two although even then, such evidence would not have been enough to establish causality. It also ambiguously claims last years college graduates have made impressive achievements in college. There is no mention of which fields this achievements have been made in, as well as whether there has been an increase in the frequency of these achievements from the prior year. As a result, we are also not able to establish any correlation between the use of computer instructions and these achievements.
Thirdly, even if we do assume that the provision of computer instruction in three subjects did improve student performances, such evidence on its own does not warrant the conclusion that computer instruction must be utilized throughout the curriculum. It is quite possible that students respond positively to computer instruction in Mathematics, whereas subjects such as Geography and Political Science require the vital discussions between the teacher and other students to enhance understanding, which cannot be provided by a digital medium.
Finally, even if we incorrectly assume that the usage of computer instruction did prove beneficial to the students of Nova High School, such evidence is not enough to conclude that it would benefit students from all schools in the district equally. It is quite possible that students of other schools in the district are not as technologically capable and computer literate as students of Nova High School and don't respond well to the usage of such instruction. It is equally possible that other schools lack the funding to invest in such technology without compromising on other utilities.
Thus, the argument is flawed for the wide variety of reasons provided above. It is quite possible that allocating more budget to computers in the future does prove beneficial to students, but the editorial must provide more subject wise data related to the instruction and dropout rate to support its claims.
Moderators:
188 posts
