Requiring Class Attendance Shows Low Teaching Level,Requirin

　　Requiring Class Attendance Shows Low Teaching Level

　　Requiring Class Attendance Shows Low Teaching Level

　　During my two-year-long college life, most of my teachers don't require class attendance. Some of them even said, "There is no need to attend my class if you find anything more attractire." But there are still many who insist on making class attendance a rigid policy. Here are their arguments:

　　Teachers spend lots of time preparing and teaching a course which contains the cream of their knowledge. Missing the class wastes your chance to absorb the cream and by doing it, you show no respect for your teacher.

　　Some students lose the motivation to study when there is no one beside to force him to study. Class attendance requirement is directed against those lazy ones. It can compel them to attend the

　　class.

　　Sounds reasonable. But does this regulation really work? I find that the courses that require class attendance contain the following ones, such as "Max's Philosophy", and one of my specialized courses called "Analysis Chemistry". They share the same feature:dull.

　　Every one has to attend the class because of the regulation and because of the grade point. The classroom is full of students and the teacher seems contended. It seems that only by attending the class can we show our respect for the teacher. But it is not the truth, for almost half of the students have a good sleep or do their homework during the class while the others take notes apathetically. Respect doesn't come from the rate of attendance but from the teacher's splendid teaching.

　　Because of the attendance requirement, those who are busy sleeping, playing PC games or having dates have no choice but to come to the classroom. The regulation can tie up their bodies but not their souls. How can you imagine that brains full of comfortable beds, exciting game screens and beautiful girls will learn anything from the teachers, especially those who teach the course only by reading books?

　　It comes to my point that requiring class attendance can not effectively attract students to learn more. And the only solution is to improve the quality and fascination of classroom instruction. One of my classmates has great interest in playing PC games and goes to class scarcely, even those which require class attendance. But every Friday morning, he is never absent from the course Meticulous Organic Chemistry. Why? He told me that he learnt lots of things that could never be found in the books and the teachers' humorous speech always sobered him up.

　　So when you take a course that requires class attendance,you should be prepared to endure a really dull one.

　　簡 評

　　本文旨在抨擊現(xiàn)在的上課點名制。作者直陳親身見聞，揭示教育制度的弊端。語言犀利，觀點雖不免偏激，但對教育工作者也有一定的啟示作用。文章有以下兩點寫作特色：

　　一、立論巧妙。寫議論文要題目范圍小，中心明確，才能講得清，講得透，才能使人接受。本文作者沒有籠統(tǒng)地說上課點名制度是“好”還是“不好”，而是一針見血地指明“上課點名制”和“教學(xué)水平”的關(guān)系，主題十分具體。文章的所有議論都緊緊圍繞這一中心展開，引言、主體部分以及結(jié)尾都提到了兩者的相關(guān)性。

　　二、駁論有力。本文是典型的駁論文，作者首先列出兩點反面論點：考勤是對教師的尊重和對學(xué)生的督促；然后以此為靶，通過描述教室里的真實現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行批駁，指出形式上的出勤并不能代表實質(zhì)上的用心。最后以身邊實例進(jìn)一步強調(diào)了只有提高教學(xué)水平，才能真正吸引學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)興趣。有破有立，又有學(xué)生的心聲，真是給教師的一劑苦口良藥!

　　作者語言平實易懂，但有些表達(dá)欠準(zhǔn)確，個別用詞和搭配不夠恰當(dāng)。

　　(點評教師：辛紅葉)

　　Requiring Class Attendance Shows Low Teaching Level