help rate essay portion?

[levo99p]

K I just took PowerPrep test.... i'm copy pasting both issue and argument essays but if anyone can rate/provide comments for either issue or argument, i'll be super grateful! am an international so this is HARD for me.... thank you!!    

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 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 canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand our coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs" 

At first glance, the memorandum may make sense; however, to fully evaluate the claim, we need much more evidence/information. 

 

The first evidence we need to evaluate the argument is whether the complaints received are representative of the entire viewers' opinions. While the memorandum states that 'most of the complaints' that were received from the viewers were concerned with the station's coverage of weather and local news, it is mute on how many of such complaints were received. If the station received only a small number of compliants, they are simply not representative of the whole population' (viewers') opinion and has little bearing on whether the station should change its news contents. Conversely, if the station received complaints from the majority of the viewers, then, the station should make serious note of the complaints and respond accordingly.

 

Another evidence we need for evaluation of the argument is the nature of their compliants. The memorandum stated that most compliants were "concerned with our station's coverage of weather and local news."; however, HOW exactly were they concerned with the coverage of weather and local news? Those who filed complaints might simply hoped to view more of weather and local news; in this case, (assuming that this opinion is representative of the majority), the station should consider devoting more time to weather and local news instead of reducing time devoted to weather and local news. Or perhaps the viewers simply complained about the quality of the weather and local news (but were opposed to actually reducing time dedicated to weather and local news). If this was the case, it would also not make sense for the station to devote less time to weather and local news. On the other hand, if the viewers complained about the undue attention devoted to weather and local news (and wanted the station to restore the time devoted to national news), then the station should consider devoting more time to national news. 

 

Finally, to adequately evaluate the claim, we need to know for what reasons exactly local businesses canceled their advertising contracts with the station. Local businesses' termination of their advertising contracts may not have had anything to do with the contents of the late-night news program. Perhaps the economy contracted and the businesses were forced to terminate  advertising campaigns. If this is the case, modifying contents of the news program will have no effect whatsover on whether local businesses renew advertising contracts or not. Conversely, if it turns out that local businesses indeed canceled their advertising contracts since they were not fond of the change in program's contents (and hoped to see more national news), then it will make sense for the station to consider restoring time devoted to national news. Hence, without being given information on why local businesses canceled their advertsiting contracts,  we cannot fully evaluate the campaign.

 

In sum, without the evidences stated, we cannot fully evaluate the claim.  

 

 

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

 

The claim states that a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. In my opnion, doing so definitely confers great advantages -- for example, it allows college admission officers to more accurately and easily assess each applicant's academic achievement. However, not allowing any flexiblity in requiring students to study the same curriculum inflicts harm in students' learning.

 

One of the main benefits conferred by ensuring that students study the same national curriculum until they enter college is that as a nation, we can ensure that all students learn the basic materials and knowledge. Designing and developing curriculum is not an easy task. It requires months, sometimes years of careful planning so that we ensure that the curriculum adequately covers the depth and breath of knowledge expected of students at each level. And while private, affluent schools may well have the resources to develop such currilum, some schools, especially those located in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, may not have the financial and personnel resources to adequately develop well-designed curriculum. In this regard, developing a national curriculum and having every school to use the curriculum will promote equality in education -- every student studies a well-designed curriculum.

 

In addition, requiring all of its students to study the same national curriculum has the advantage of faciliating the college admission process. Imagine applicants' high school curriculum differed greatly from one applicant to another. Then, admission committees will surely have a hard time assessing candidates' academic achievements since students were tested on different materials, by different test methods, etc.

 

However, too rigid of a national curriculum does more harm than good. For example, consider two groups of students who attend arts vs. science high schools. Do we really want to make both groups of students study the same exact curriculum? Definitely not. In science high school, curriculum should reflect students' aptitutde and interests in science subjects; in arts school, students should spend more time studying and practicing arts. Consequently, we should make sure that the national curriculum allows enough flexiblity to reflect students' interests and aptitutde. One way to achieve this is to have the national curriculum offer studies in all core subjects (e.g. science, english) but allow each school to add materials/subjects to the curriculum.

 

In sum, requiring all students to study the same national curriculum has its advantages -- it promotes equality in education and faciliates college admission process. Nonetheless, not allowing any flexibility in the national curriculum does more harm than good.