Here is another one: (completed in 29:55)
Merely based on unfounded assumptions and weak correlations, the argument in the newspaper editorial draws the conclusion that school board should use available funds to buy more computers and all the schools in the district should follow the same practice. To support this conclusion, the author claims that immediately after one high school started using interactive computer instruction, drop out rates have gone down. The author further points out that last year’s graduates have done well in college because of exposure to the computer instruction. At first glance, the argument appears to be convincing. However, careful analysis reveals that the argument, in fact, suffers from several logical flaws.
First, the author infers an effect of the use of interactive instruction on the school’s drop out rate. This is a stretch; correlation does not equate causation. There could have been other unstated factors that cause a rapid decline in drop out rates among students. If, for example, at the time Nova High School introduced the interactive computer instruction, a local philanthropist started a scholarship for at-risk students. If those students promise to stay in school and go to college, the philanthropist would fund their tuition. Perhaps, in that instance, students who were likely to drop out of high school would stay. Since the author did not disclose any other factor that may have impact student’s decision to stay in school, it is impossible to determine whether the interactive computer instruction can be attributed to the sudden decline in drop out rate.
Secondly, the author assumes that the reason recent graduates are doing well in college is because they were exposed to the interactive computer instruction in high school. This argument is an oversimplification. It fails to consider the possibility that students may receive a better education or have much better teachers in college. If, for example, students meet renown college professors who are excellent teachers, students may learn more effectively than they did in high school. Consequently, students will do well on assignments and tests. Since the author cannot know for certain the education students receive in college does not affect their academic performance. It is impossible to determine whether the interactive computer instruction is responsible the impressive achievements.
Finally, the author suggests that all schools in the district should adopt the same computer instruction system. This statement is unfounded. The author assumes what works in Nova High School will work in other schools too. The author did not consider the fact that each school is comprised of a unique student body. Students in other schools may come from various background with different ethnicity, and economic level. There are many factors that will affect the success of the computer instruction system. If, for example, a high school with mostly poor students who have not been exposed to advance technology, these students may have difficulties navigating and adapting to such innovative instruction. Since the author fails to provide relevant information to make a proper comparison between different high schools. It is impossible to determine whether the interactive computer instruction will work in other schools in the district.
In summary, the argument could be strengthened if the author had provided relevant information to help evaluate the relationship between the success of the program and the results he wishes to establish. At it stands, however, the argument is flawed for the reasons indicated.
Attachments
Screen Shot 2018-12-07 at 11.35.45 PM.png [ 79.9 KiB | Viewed 1584 times ]