GRE作文范文 Issue-19

"Both parents and communities must be involved in the local schools. Education is too important to leave solely to a group of professional educators."

嘉文博译Sample Essay

Local schools are an integral part of a society and of each individual community. Much of what happens in a community is directly tied in to the local schools, whether the members of that community's children are of school age or not. The quality of the local schools also depends a great deal on the community. If the schools are well supported, they generally will be good quality schools. If the community ignores or contributes to the school's problems, the schools and students may not perform to the best of their abilities. Without the involvement of parents and the surrounding communities, professional educators cannot do their jobs properly. Additionally, the involvement of the parents ensures that educators will keep the school children as their first priority, rather than focusing on maximizing personal profits through teachers unions and the like.
Traditionally in years past, the parents and communities cooperated to set up schools to serve all the children in a particular location. As the United States has become larger, local, state and federal governments have become further involved, thus lessening the responsibilities of the parents with regards to the schools. Parents cannot and should not abdicate all of their responsibilities to the various governmental bodies, however. It remains incumbent upon the parents and communities to remain involved in as many aspects of the local schools as they can.

First of all, the most fundamental responsibility of the parents is that they must ensure that their own children are properly dressed, on time and actually behaving themselves in the classrooms. Professional educators cannot properly teach children that don't know how to behave while at school. Other children are distracted or maybe even misled to misbehave themselves by children who are chronically disruptive. Parents must control their own children and not leave the job of child behavioral training to the teachers at school.
Secondly, parents and communities must make sure that they contribute financially to their local schools, and not only by the mandatory payment of taxes to the government. School groups are always trying to raise money for some beneficial school projects. It is important that parents do not turn their backs when school children come door to door asking for money, even when (and maybe especially when) it is not their own children who are asking for help.

Furthermore, parents have more than just a financial responsibility to the local schools, they also have an obligation to give generously of their time whenever possible. Attending their own child's sports games and recitals are certainly important. Volunteering to coach, referee or to help organize activities for the school children are also extremely important. Local schools seem to never have enough help to accomplish all that needs to be done or to accomplish all that should be done. Just ask any teacher or professional educator, they can probably find a place for any volunteer that desires to help.

Finally, parents and communities must be involved with local schools just to be sure that the professional educators are indeed "professional" and are giving the children the proper educational basics that they need. Direct and continuous communications with a teacher or principal can sometimes give parents all the information that they need to decide whether he or she is properly fit for the job. Powerful teachers unions have developed over the years that sometimes tend to put the teachers first and the priorities of the children second. By staying involved with the local schools, parents and the communities can show the educators that they are committed to the children and the schools, and that they should always remember whom the schools were built for in the first place.

The success or failure of a local school depends almost entirely on the involvement of parents and the local community. The parents and others in these communities must be willing to make sure that their own children are properly behaved, that they support the school both financially and with their time, and that the professional educators always put the well-being of the children as the number one priority.

参考译文

家长和社区都必须参与到地方学校对青少年的教育中去。教育的至关重要性决定了它不能只依靠专业的教育工作者

　　地方学校是整个社会及个人所属的社区不可缺少的组成部分。无论社区中的孩子是否达到上学的年龄，这个社区发生的很多事情都会与其学校有着直接的联系。地方学校的好坏也极大地依赖于它们所属的社区。如果社区努力办学，则学校的质量就会很高。如果社区忽视学校的建设或者使学校产生一些问题，则学校就不能充分发挥其作用而学生的能力也得不到最好的开发。没有家长和社区的支持，专业的教育工作者不能够很好地开展工作。另外，家长的支持与监督能保证教育者将孩子的教育放在最首位而避免他们将精力放在通过教师联合会或其他类似组织来谋取个人利益上。

　　根据过去的传统，家长和社区在特定的地区协力创办学校，为当地所有的孩子提供教育。随着美国的扩展，地方、各州及联邦各级政府加大了对学校教育的扶持，因而家长对学校的责任有所减少。然而实际上，家长不能也不应该放弃他们对学校教育承担的责任而交由各种政府部门管理。家长和社区有义务尽可能多地参与地方学校各方面的工作。

　　首先，家长最基本的责任就是保证他们的孩子穿着得体地按时去上学并在课堂上有良好的表现。对那些连在学校应该如何作为都不知道的孩子，专业的教育者不可能有效地进行教育。还有的孩子可能会受到坏孩子的影响甚至被坏孩子误导，做出不好的行为来。家长必须管教自己的孩子，不要把约束孩子行为表现的工作留给学校的老师来做。

　　其次，家长和社区必须在经济上支持地方学校而不仅仅是给政府缴纳必需的税款。学校团体常常要为开展一些有益的学校计划进行募捐。当孩子们上门来要求捐款，尤其是当别人家的孩子上门来要求捐款时，家长不应置之不理或予以拒绝，做到这一点是非常重要的。

　　而且，家长对地方学校负有的责任不应该仅仅是在钱财上的支持，他们还应该尽可能慷慨地将自己的时间投入到学校中去。参加自己孩子的运动会、朗诵会意义重大，主动帮助学校的孩子们组织活动，充当教练或裁判也是极其重要的。地方学校在达成需要完成的工作或应该完成的工作时似乎从未得到过充分的帮助。只要你愿意主动帮忙，随便问任何一个老师，都会找到需要你帮忙的地方。

　　最后，家长和社区参与到地方学校的工作中去可以确保那些专业的教育工作者确实是"专业"人员，确保他们能够教授孩子所需的基础知识。与老师和校长直接、频繁的交流可以让家长全面了解教师，看出他们是否适合教育这个岗位。近年来的发展使教师联合会的权力增大，有时倾向于将教师放在首位而将对孩子的考虑放在其次。家长和社区对地方学校工作的参与能提示教师他们对孩子、学校负有的责任，让他们记住学校首先是为谁设立的。

　　一所地方学校办得成功与否几乎完全依赖于家长和社区是否参与学校的工作。孩子的家长以及社区内的其他成员都必须愿意确保自己的孩子表现良好，确保他们自己在金钱上和时间上给予了支持，而且学校的专业教育者们将孩子的利益放在了第一位。

 

GRE作文范文 Argument-19

"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."

嘉文博译Sample Essay

This argument discusses the proposition whether a century-old, all-female college should change its admissions policy and allow men to enter into its programs. Although a majority of the faculty members voted in favor of the change for coeducation, the president and administrative staff note that eighty percent of the students that responded to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female as did over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey. The arguers then state that keeping the college all female will therefore improve morale among students and convince the alumni to continue supporting the college financially. This argument is unconvincing due to several critical flaws.

First of all, the main support that the president and administrative staff rely on is the two surveys conducted by the student government of the current students and alumni. It is possible that the survey itself was flawed, perhaps asking leading questions that subliminally led the respondents to answer in favor of keeping the current all female admissions policy. However, even assuming that the survey was neutrally worded, it remains problematic to rely on it as evidence that there is widespread support for continuing as an all-female college. Firstly, the people that actually take the time to respond to surveys usually have a strong opinion one way or the other. In this case, it is likely that those that feel that the tradition of the school is being threatened by the possibility of admitting men to the college are the ones who would respond to the survey. Those that have a neutral opinion, or that would actually like to see the college opened to men, may not have a strong enough opinion to take the time to respond to the survey. The total number of surveys conducted by the student government is not mentioned in the argument. It is possible that very few people actually responded to the survey, which would indicate that most students actually don't care one way or the other. Similarly, with the alumni survey, the arguers only mention those who answered the survey, but don't mention how many total surveys there were or how many people did not answer the survey. For these reasons, the argument is not well supported by the surveys.

Secondly, by surveying only current students and alumni, the pool of those sampled is limited to those who previously accepted the all-female admissions policy of the school and thus are much more likely to support its continuance. Current students and alumni applied to and attended the school with its current policy in place, thereby prejudicing their own opinions as to what is best for the school. Additionally, with the survey limited to only current students and alumni, the student government did not poll those whose opinion matters the most - potential students. A college cannot survive based on its past successes - it is the future that will determine the long-term viability of the college and potential students are the most important part of that future. It is much more important to determine how many students would attend the college if the policy were changed. Furthermore, the arguers ignore the opinion of a vital part of the college, that of the majority of its faculty members who probably have a better overall view of the situation than students or alumni.

Finally, there is no evidence presented to show that keeping the college all female will improve morale among the students or keep the alumni donations coming in. This statement has no causal relationship demonstrated in the argument, whether the results of the survey are accurate or not. Had the question been asked in the survey- whether keeping the admissions policy the same would improve students' morale and keep alumni financial support intact - there may have at least been some basis for this statement, but without it the statement is groundless.

In summary, the argument is based on only two surveys of a limited sample of people with a built-in bias towards keeping the status quo. Without further evidence and a more fairly distributed survey, the argument ultimately fails to deliver on its premise.

参考译文

　　下面的建议是格罗夫学院--一个私有机构--院长和管理人员写给学院和管理委员会的。

　　我们建议，格罗夫学院坚持其具有百年传统的全女生教育，不接受男生入学。的确，大多数教师表决赞成男女同校，说这样可以鼓励更多的学生申请就读于格罗夫学院。但是，由学生管理机构进行的调查表明，百分之八十的学生希望学校坚持全女生教育，而且在另一个单独的调查中，过半的校友反对男女同校。因此，保持学院全女生教育，会在学生中振奋精神面貌，并确使校友继续从财力上支持学院。"

　　 这一论点讨论的命题是，一所具有百年历史的全女生学院是否应该改变其招生政策，允许男生就读该校。尽管教师中大多数表决赞成改为男女同校，但是院长和管理人员注意到在学生管理机构进行的调查中，百分之八十的学生希望学校继续保持全女生教育，在另一个分别进行的调查中有过半的校友亦复如此。该论点进一步指出，保持学院全女生教育因而会在学生中振奋士气并确使校友继续从财力上支持该学院。这一论点因为几处重要的缺陷而显得不能令人信服。

　 首先，院长及管理人员所依赖的主要佐证论点是由学生管理机构所进行的在校生和校友的调查。很可能调查自身是有缺陷的。或许所问的主要问题都下意识地引导调查对象的回答有利于维持现行的全女生入学政策。但是，即使假设调查所使用的语言是中性的，依赖它来证明对维持一所全女生学院的广泛支持仍然是有问题的。首先，实际上对调查作出回应的人们常常具有三种倾向性。这样，很有可能那些认为学校的传统正在受到招收男学生的可能性威胁的人会积极参与调查。那些具有中立观点的人，甚至那些实际上愿意看到学校向男生开放的人，可能没有强烈愿望花时间去认真对待调查。学生管理机构所进行的调查人数，在论证过程中没有提及。可能只有极少数人对调查作了回答，这表明大多数学生实际上不关心只收女生还是男女同校。同样在校友调查中，论证者在提到那些对调查作出回应的人，却并没有提到受调查的总人数以及多少人没有对调查作出回应。因此，论点并没有得到调查的有力支持。

　　其次，只是对在校生和校友进行调查，取样范围仅限于那些以前接受学校全女生招生政策的人，因此他们更可能支持继续这种作法。在校生和校友都是在现政策实施时申请入学和上学的，因而他们对于学校怎样才好抱有偏见。此外，因为调查仅限于在校生和校友，学生管理机构没有对那些潜在的学生进行民意测验，而他们的观点才是最重要的。一所大学不能靠过去的成功生存，而未来才决定学校的长期活力，潜在学生是未来最重要的组成部分。更为重要的是确定在政策改变之后有多少学生将会上学。再者，论证者忽视了学校里关键成份的意见--那些很可能比学生和校友对全局具有更正确看法的大多数教师的意见。

　　最后，论证中并没有提供证据来证明保持全女生学院会振奋学生的士气或确保校友的捐助。无论调查的结果准确与否，这一说法与论点都缺乏因果关系。倘若调查中包含有这样的问题--保持原有的招生政策是否会振奋学生的士气并维持校友财力上的支持--那么这种说法还有点依据。但是并没有提出这样的问题，所以这一结论是毫无根据的。

　　总之，论点只是基于两个抽样有限的调查，而且具有保持现状的内在偏见。在没有进一步的调查以及一个分布更合理的调查情况下，论证完全没有为其命题提供充分的依据。

嘉文博译郑重声明：