Twenty years ago, only half of the students who graduated from Einstei
[#permalink]
01 Aug 2019, 04:38
The question:
The following appeared in a speech delivered by a member of the city council:
“Twenty years ago, only half of the students who graduated from Einstein High School went on to attend a college or university. Today, two–thirds of the students who graduate from Einstein do so. Clearly, Einstein has improved its educational effectiveness over the past two decades. This improvement has occurred despite the fact that the school’s funding, when adjusted for inflation, is about the same as it was 20 years ago. Therefore, we do not need to make any substantial increase in the school’s funding at this time.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
My response:
The member of the city council claims that the city council does not need to increase the funding to Einstein High School substantially since the school has been able to improve its educational effectiveness despite its funding remained the same over the past twenty years. This conclusion is based on the premise that the proportion of the Einstein High School graduates who went on to attend a college or university has increased over the last twenty years from 50% to 67%. However, the argument of the city council member is flawed for the following two reasons.
First, the argument readily assumes that increase in the proportion of the Einstein High School’s graduates who choose to attend a college or university is because the school has improved its education effectiveness. In this regard, the argument has failed to mention other factors that might have encouraged more graduates of the high school to attend a college. For example, employers may have started offering substantially higher wages to those employees with at least college degrees than to those without such degrees, spurring the demand for college or university degrees. If this was real case, the author is allowing huge flaw in his argument. If the argument had ruled out other factors that might affected the change, it could have been substantially strengthened.
Second, the author of the argument further assumes that the school’s educational effectiveness determines the funding required to that school. This claim might seem true, but the author has failed to substantiated it. The funding required to schools might depend on many other factors. For example, this year devastating flood might have occurred in the school’s district and damaged most of the school’s buildings. In this case, the school will need substantially more money than it usually obtained from government to reconstruct its buildings.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed because it made unsubstantiated assumptions. Therefore, it is unconvincing.