The writer of the argument recommends that if the Saluda School board does such a thing, the students in their school will improve in music and regional band competitions. However, this recommendation cannot be accepted as it is because it rests on a number of premises all of which can be challenged in one way or another.
The first problem with the argument is that the writer considered no differences between the students in both schools. There is no strong evidence to prove that the students in the two schools are the same in all respects. Maybe the students in the Saluda school generally are less interested in music bands and related activities or maybe their field of study, by no means are related to music and things like that.
Secondly, the writer of the arguments also assumed that the conditions in the region where Saluda School is are exactly the same as that of Steel City High region. Clearly, we cannot guarantee that Mr. Shade’s music education programs will result the same outcomes in all regions. Maybe music progress in one region is higher than the progress in other regions or maybe there are more music bands in one region so the competition and also the penchant for music is a lot more than that of other regions.
A third problem with the argument as I can see is that family and students’ life outside the school are another important factors which the writer of the argument did not analyze. Parents and other people outside the school may affect the students’ progress and performance in music education. For example, in one family there are other persons who play a music instrument or encourage their children to music and art. Or maybe the students’ progress is a result of their tight and regular practices at home not the school music education programs. So as I clearly stated there are no evidences in support of which the students’ progress is due to Mr. Schade and his programs.
To put it together, the writer’s recommendation is based on a set of unsubstantiated assumptions all of which are questionable and the writer did not give us any strong evidence to validate the recommendation. In the final analysis, the recommendations can only be accepted if the weaknesses already referred to in the body paragraphs are all removed.
The
writer
of the
argument
recommends that if the
Saluda
School
board does such a thing, the
students
in their
school
will
improve
in
music
and regional band competitions.
However
, this
recommendation
cannot be
accepted
as it is
because
it rests on a number of premises all of which can
be challenged
in one way or another.
The
first
problem with the
argument
is that the
writer
considered no differences between the
students
in both
schools
. There is no strong evidence to prove that the
students
in the two
schools
are the same in all respects. Maybe the
students
in the
Saluda
school
generally
are less interested in
music
bands and related activities or maybe their field of study, by no means
are related
to
music
and things like that.
Secondly
, the
writer
of the
arguments
also
assumed that the conditions in the
region
where
Saluda
School
is are exactly the same as that of Steel City High
region
.
Clearly
, we cannot guarantee that Mr. Shade’s
music
education programs will result the same outcomes in all
regions
. Maybe
music
progress
in one
region
is higher than the
progress
in
other
regions
or maybe there are more
music
bands in one
region
so
the competition and
also
the penchant for
music
is a lot more than that of
other
regions.
A third problem with the
argument
as I can
see
is that family and
students’
life outside the
school
are another
important
factors which the
writer
of the
argument
did not analyze. Parents and
other
people
outside the
school
may affect the
students’
progress
and performance in
music
education.
For example
, in one family there are
other
persons who play a
music
instrument or encourage their children to
music
and art. Or maybe the
students’
progress
is a result of their tight and regular practices at home not the
school
music
education programs.
So
as I
clearly
stated there are no evidences in support of which the
students’
progress
is due to Mr.
Schade
and his programs.
To put it together, the
writer’s
recommendation
is based
on a set of unsubstantiated assumptions all of which are questionable and the
writer
did not give us any strong evidence to validate the
recommendation
. In the final analysis, the
recommendations
can
only
be
accepted
if the weaknesses already referred to in the body paragraphs are all removed.