The following appeared in a memorandum from the mayor of Wistfold. “A recent study revealed that the number of children requiring medical attention for illnesses in our town is 40 percent higher than in the neighboring town of Champsfield.
-
March 11, 2021 at 10:56 am
The following appeared in a memorandum from the mayor of Wistfold.
“A recent study revealed that the number of children requiring medical attention for
illnesses in our town is 40 percent higher than in the neighboring town of Champsfield.
Last year the Champsfield school district implemented an educational program called
“Kerzac Plus” that promotes healthier habits among children. Because prepackaged
convenience foods have less nutritional value than fresh fruits and vegetables, Kerzac Plus
guidance led to banning the sale of candy bars and soft drinks in Champsfield schools.
Kerzac Plus also provides informational posters and live presentations for children that
explain the importance of healthy foods and exercise, as well as the risks of making
unhealthy lifestyle choices. The clearest explanation for the lower medical needs of
Champsfield’s children compared withWistfold’s is the introduction of the Kerzac Plus
program to promote student health.”Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could
rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account
for the facts presented in the argument.What the author believes can somehow explain the result of the study, but there are some alternative explanations which may also lead to the same result.
For starters, the number of children in our town may be higher than Champsfield. With more children, it is normal that more children in Wistfold need medical attention than the neighboring town. For example, we can assume that Wistfold is a large town with more than ten thousand children, while the neighboring town has only one thousand children. Even if the rate of children who need medical attention in Wistfold is lower than that in Champsfield, with more children in Wistfold, the absolute number of that kind of children is likely to be greater. Therefore, this condition can also explain the study’s result.
Second, the construction of sports filed will affect the study as well. Although the Champsfield school implemented an educational program to teach students to choose health life style, a possible situation is that children in fact found there were scarce sports filed for them to exercise. Therefore, despite they were educated to work out more, they actually could not finish that task. However, one day the government decided to build more basketball courts and football fields. Then children in Champsfield now could complete their sports task, thus increasing the health rate in Champsfield. In this case, the program does not take much effect comparing to the construction of sports field as I proposed.
Besides, family education is a point the author did not take into account. Children can actually access unhealthy food like candy and soft drink outside the school. In this case, the program cannot restrict this action at all. But family can teach their children not to buy those kinds of food. With the warrant from family, children now can truly be insulated from junk food and thus live a healthy life. Without the education of family, children can still eat snakes and soft drinks.
In conclusion, the explanation raised by the author may to be the true answer of this problem. There are other reasonable explanations that need to be considered carefully.
March 12, 2021 at 4:51 pmScore: 70.5
I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems.
March 14, 2021 at 3:44 amRevision:
What the author believes can somehow explain the result of the study. But there are some alternative explanations that can also lead to the same result.
For starters, the number of children in our town may be higher than Champsfield. With more children, it is normal that more children in Wistfold need medical attention than the neighboring town. For example, we can assume that Wistfold is a large town with more than ten thousand children. On the contrary, such population is only one thousand in neighboring town. Even if the rate of children who need medical attention in Wistfold is lower, the absolute number of that kind of children tends to be greater. Thus, the result is going to be what the passage shows. Therefore, this reason can indeed explain the study’s result.
Second, the construction of sports fields will affect the study as well. Although students had learned to choose healthy lifestyle through the program, dearth of sports fields might be possible. Therefore, they actually could not work out as suggested. Until one day, the government decided to build more basketball courts and football fields. Then children in Champsfield could complete their sports tasks, thus increasing the health rate in Champsfield. In this case, the program did not take much effect compared to the construction of sports field as I proposed. It is the government’s project that brought about the consequence.
Besides, family education is a point the author did not take into account. Since the restriction can only be applied in school, children can still access unhealthy food outside the school. In this case, the program cannot prevent this action at all. But family can teach their children not to buy those kinds of food. With this warrant, children will stay away from junk food for they are afraid of scorns from their parents. As a result, the children are living a healthier life in Champsfield.
In conclusion, the explanation raised by the author may be the true answer to this problem. There are other reasonable explanations that need to considere carefully.
March 16, 2021 at 1:48 pmWhat the author believes can somehow explain the result of the study
. But[ , but ]there are some alternative explanations that can also lead to the same result.For starters, the number of children in our town may be higher than [ that in ] Champsfield. With
morechildren[ this higher number ], it is normal that more children in Wistfold need medical attention than [ those in ]the neighboring town. For example, we can assume that Wistfold is a large town with more thanten thousand[ten-thousand /ten thousands of ] children. On the contrary, (such population is only one thousand in [ the ]neighboring town)[ unclear ]. Even if the rate of children who need medical attention in Wistfold is lower, the absolute number ofthat kind ofchildren [ in such a need ] tends to be greater.Thus, (the result is going to be what the passage shows.)Therefore, this reason can indeed explain the study’s result.[make it clear ]Second, the construction of sports fields will affect the study as well[use conditional writing ]. Although students had learned to choose [ article error ]healthy lifestyle (through)[ unclear/use verb ] the program, dearth of sports fields might be possible. Therefore, they[ unclear pronoun ] actually could not work out as suggested. Until one day, the government decided[ tense error ] to build more basketball courts and football fields. Then children in Champsfield could complete their sports tasks, thus increasing the (health rate)[? ] in Champsfield. In this case, the program[what program ] did not [avoid using Not ]take much effect compared to the construction of sports field as I proposed. It is the government’s project that brought about the consequence.[unclear ]
Besides, family education is a [ article error ]point the author did not take into account. Since( the restriction)[ ? ] can only be applied in school, children can still access unhealthy food outside the school. In this case, the program cannot prevent this action at all. [ punctuation error with coordinating word ]But family can teach their children not to buy those kinds of food. With this warrant, children will stay away from junk food[ zero-conditional writing ] for [since ]they are afraid of scorns[ word form error ] from their parents. As a result, the children are living a healthier life in Champsfield.[ unclear ]
In conclusion, the explanation raised by the author may be the true answer to this problem. There are other reasonable explanations that need to considere[wrong word/grammatical error ] carefully.
March 17, 2021 at 8:34 pmOn-hold.
