Hi All,

First time poster here - am active on Urch but their forums seem a bit quieter than they were a few years ago.

I was wondering if any of you would be willing to provide feedback on and grade my first attempts at an Issue based topic and an Argument topic. I have run these through Score It Now; and would be happy to provide what the software thought of them after a few people have reviewed them. These were done in very close to 30 mins +/- 2 mins.As an aside I found the Argument task significantly harder.

ISSUE

A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how those examples shape your position.

This essay will argue that a Nation should indeed by default, require its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter College, because it allows for students to be taught according to a set of consistent principles which help them understand the World, and more importantly allows students to be benchmarked relative to one another. However this essay also notes that certain students should be exempted from this requirement; such as those with learning disabilities.

A National curriculum is a vital component of the fabric of society, it allows for children to be educated according to a set of common principles, that help them perceive and understand a multitude of phenomena to which they will be exposed during their formative years. For example, understanding that the time that it will take them to actually get to school on the bus is a function of both the speed of the bus, and the distance the bus has to travel. It is important that children are given the opportunity to understand and reason with such facts at a uniform point in their lives. If a student in one school was taught such facts at one point in their life, and another student (perhaps one that went to another school in the same very city) was taught this at another age, then those two students (who could potentially be friends travelling on the same very bus to school) may not be able to understand and discuss topics with one another. This could potentially lead to instances of bullying, whereby one student labels another "dumb" or "unintelligent", because he or she believes that the student in question is unable to comprehend a given topic. However in actuality that student has not come across the given topic in their curriculum yet. For this reason it is important students study the same curriculum, such that they're given an equal basis with which to understand and digest the World around them.

Another important reason that students study an identical curriculum is so that student performance can be benchmarked, this typically takes the form of examinations. If two students study a different curriculum it is difficult to understand the relative performance of two given students. This could manifest itself in two ways. If two students study similar material and are tested at the end of the academic year according to two different examinations (as is becoming more common in the United Kingdom where some 18-year old students study the International Baccalaureate, and others A-Levels) then this introduces an element of conjecture or interpretation when considering two students academic performance. An alternative would be is that two pupils of the same age actually studied completely different subject matter, then how would you be able to identify which student has performed better? This has very real implications for things such as College admissions, and more generally determining the relative academic success of a student.

However; this essay also recognises that there are specific circumstances whereby a Nation may wish to exclude a specific subset of students from a National curriculum, for example those with learning disabilities, a commonly cited example being dyslexia (a difficulty to read or interpret words). Those students that are challenged by such disabilities may find it relatively more difficult to deal with particular aspects of a curriculum than their unaffected peers. Such a situation could result in a number of factors such as the National curriculum being watered down, or made easier, such that less able students are able to comprehend it, but this would lead to more able students not being able to fulfil their potential. Another potential scenario could be that if the curriculum is not adjusted to cater for those less able students, would be that they're not able to keep pace with the speed or the complexity of the learning, and would fall behind their peers, which again could lead to bullying and disillusionment. For these reasons it may be a better option to allow such students to be excluded from the broader National curriculum, and to be permitted to study an alternative one.

In conclusion we have argued that as a default a Nation should require its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter College, but acknowledges that a certain subset of the student population (e.g. those with learning disabilities) should be exempted, such that they can study a curriculum more suited to their specific educational needs.

ARGUMENT

The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station.

"Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have just canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to the program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level."

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

This essay will argue that the argument provided by the business manager of a television station is littered with numerous examples of logical fallacies, firstly, that there is a clear interrelationship between complaints and viewers, and secondly, that less local news coverage results in local businesses cancelling advertising contracts, which undermine his or her conclusions. It will also explore what specific evidence could be provided to reinforce his argument.

The business manager suggests that "in order to attract more viewers to the program...we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level" (at the expense of national news). The text confounds the relationship between complaints received from viewers, and attempts to draw a correlation with viewing figures. This is a significant error, whilst there may be some interrelationship between the two variables, this conclusion is not assured. Just because the majority of complains relates to weather and local news, does not mean that the numbers of viewers will change. An alternative explanation could be that because local news and weather are more directly relevant to a viewer's life, they may have a more concrete opinion on a given matter versus some larger more abstract concept explored in national news (e.g. the closure of the local bakery in contrast to national GDP declining 5% year on year), and are therefore more likely to disagree with stories presented in the news. In order to understand this relationship a study would need to be undertaken to understand the interdependency between viewing figures and complaints. Asking such questions as "Why did you complain about this issue?" and "Did your complaint about this issue result in you deciding to no longer watch the Late Night News?" would at least help to give some insight into whether complaints have any impact on viewing. At the same time asking some questions could also indicate no interrelationship between complaints and viewers, and indeed on the contrary there could be more complaints because the topics covered are incendiary, but at the same time this could be the very reason a viewer watches the show.

Another important mistake the passage makes is equating less local news with local businesses cancelling their advertising contracts, resulting in a loss of advertising revenues. Whilst this appears to be a causal link, there could be other factors at play here. Local businesses might not necessarily be cancelling their contracts because of the increased time devoted to national news, but rather it could be for reasons such as the economy, If the economic environment is more challenging, then in order to maintain their margin many businesses cut back on expenditures, an important component of which is advertising expenditure. This is unrelated to the type of coverage on the Late Night News. Analysing the underlying state of the economy, the advertising sector, and the specific local advertising companies financial performance could help identify whether this is a factor at play here. This should be linked with interviews with local businesses to understand the reasons for their cancelling of contracts. This would help to understand why they have cancelled their contracts, and could help to provide evidence for an alternative hypothesis (such as the wider economy being the key reason for contract cancellations), or evidence to help solidify the link between lost contracts and less time being devoted to local news.

In conclusion we have identified a number of logical mistakes in the business manager's memorandum which result in his conclusions being flawed. We have identified these faults and provided alternative explanations for his observations, as well as specific pieces of evidence that would be required to help accept/reject his hypothesis.