题目
Argument242 The following appeared as an editorial in the student newspaper of Groveton College.
"To combat the recently reported dramatic rise in cheating among college and university students, these institutions should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced an old-fashioned system in which students were closely monitored by teachers and an average of thirty cases of cheating per year were reported. The honor code has proven far more successful: in the first year it was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey conducted by the Groveton honor council, a majority of students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without."
翻译
为解决最近上报的大学生作弊现象显著增加的问题，大学和学院应该采取和Groveton学院类似的诚信制度，该制度要求学生同意在学业中不作弊，并且当他们怀疑别人作弊的时候通知老师。Groveton的诚信知道代替了原有的学生被老师严密监视的老体制，在老体制中平均每年有30起作弊被上报。该制度被证明成功的多：在它实施的第一年，学生上报了21起作弊；五年后，这一数值下降到了14起。而且，在最近一次由Groveton诚信委员会组织的调查中，大部分学生说有了诚信制度他们更加不太可能作弊。
频次
在上个作文季度中，该题出现17次
逻辑思路
结论： 大家应该采用G的诚信制度
论据一：老制度的劣势
论据二：新制度的优势（其中包含两个分支）
展开攻击
攻击点一：Hasty Generalization
认为G的honor code很成功，其它学校也应该采纳，并且告诉我们honor code 的具体内容。这是一个直接从结论入手的攻击点，你可以把honor code 的内容看作文章的前提而不去攻击，这样只能简单的说G的诚信制度可能带有相当严厉的惩罚措施或放任的自由度，前者可能并不适用于那些自主开放给予学生充分信任的学校（我记得Cornell好像给予学生充分的信任，考试一般不设supervisor），后者可能使原本考试体制形如鸡肋学校雪上加霜。当然，这个前提本身值得我们去思考——因为honor code 的validity值得怀疑：第一、同意不作弊不代表肯定不作弊；第二、怀疑别人作弊往往带有主观性，没有作弊而被认定为作弊显然荒谬，可能对学生心理造成不好的影响
攻击点二：Incomplete Comparison
感谢您阅读《GRE作文Argument242详解 》一文，出国留学网(liuxue86.com)编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。
