Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.
1. Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles by ten miles per hour
2. the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent
3. the speed limit in Elmsford remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period
if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase
现在再来看看最重要的the line of reasoning!
l 论据１，２之间作者建立了因果关系，特别注意开头的six month ago，那么我们就可以攻击它的时序性因果错误，找出他因，削弱论据１，２之间的因果联系．
The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore (这里省略higher)automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestville's speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.（用了seem实际上就是说not logical）(语言上，可以看出长短句的结合非常好，复述句是结构很好的长句，但是指明逻辑错误的句子短，醒目，并且就在文章开头，开门见山！使用make a comparison of sth. with sth.来提示这个类比的关系，同时therefore和subsequently指示出了因果关系)
However,（进行转折，合理衔接，下面进入了论述，这就是所谓的clear transition） the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit. Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less (这个就是所谓的minor grammar error) reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville,(车况的不同) or that the age bracket（年龄限制） of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely. （驾驶者本身的情况不同） It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford. In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas. （道路状况的不同） Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area. Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.（首先上来攻击类比的问题，其实可以看出来，作者根本没有用什么高深的逻辑学知识，就是以交通事故为核心，找出两个城镇在交通状况，驾驶员年龄以及车况这三个方面的不同，从而攻击原文作者在这里进行的类比．我的收获是，不是必须用摸版在这里写，只要层次分明的详细描述这两个town的区别就可以，这样的语言写的比较具体，否则搬摸版上来，显得比较抽象和＂虚＂）
A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area. （时间不够长也不能急于下结论，同时削弱两者的因果联系）（语言上，这里其实并没有过渡，也许这一点并不影响６分的得分吧．） It is mentioned in the argument that Elmsford accidents decreased during the time period. This may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, （驾驶的天气情况）when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. However, Forestville citizens, perhaps coerced by employment or other requirements, were unable to avoid driving on the roads. Again, the demographics of the population are important. （人口数量问题，就是前面分析题目时提到的基数问题） It is possible that Elmsford citizens do not have to travel far from work or work from their home, or do not work at all. Are there more people in Forestville than there were six months ago? If so, there may be an increased number of accidents due to more automobiles on the road, (把人口增加和交通事故增多联系起来，削弱了速度限制和交通事故增加的因果关系)and not due to the increased speed limits. Also in reference to the activities of the population, it is possible that Forestville inhabitants were traveling during less safe times of the day, （驾驶时间）such as early in the morning, or during twilight. Work or family habits may have encouraged citizens to drive during this time when Elmsford residents may not have been forced to do so.（批驳忽略他因的错误，这里的批驳还建立在两者对比的基础上，也就是说作者的批驳是建立在原文作者的这个错误类比的基础上，因为他认为这个类比是一个核心的错误．这就是官方说明里指出的：identifying a central flaw in the argument and developing that critique extensively）
Overall, the reasoning behind decreasing Forestville's speed limit back to its original seems logical as presented above since the citizens are acting in their own best interests and want to protect their safety. However, before any final decisions are made about the reduction in speed limit, the citizens and officials of Forestville should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the increased number of accidents over the six-month period as compared to Elmsford.(结尾段改写开头段提出逻辑错误那句话，并且给出了作者的意见．即官方说明里说的：what change in the argument would make the reasoning more sound.)
This outstanding essay begins by noting that the argument "seems logical." It then proceeds to discuss possible alternative explanations for the increase in car accidents and provides an impressively full analysis. Alternatives mentioned are that
-- the two regions might have drivers of different ages and experience;
-- Forestville's topography, geography, cars, and/or roads might
contribute to accidents;
-- six months might be an insufficient amount of time for determining
that the speed limit is linked to the accident rate;
-- demographics might play a role in auto accidents;
-- population and auto density should be considered; and
-- the times of day when drivers in the two regions travel might be relevant.
The points are cogently developed and are linked in such a way as to create a logically organized essay. Transitions together with interior connections create a smoothly integrated presentation. For the most part, the writer uses language correctly and well and provides excellent variety in syntax. The minor flaws (e.g., using "less" instead of "fewer") do not detract from the overall high quality of the critique. (这里我们也应该可以解读出什么是所谓的minor flaws)This is an impressive 6 paper.
The argument above presents a sound case for arguing that if the region of Forestville wants to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should consider reducing the speed limit to what it was before the increase in speed limit took place 6 months previously. However, there are some intermediate steps （中间步骤）that one could take before jumping to the conclusion that reducing the speed limit is the only way in which traffic accidents can be reduced.（这里的缺点就是没有提出核心的类比部分）（这两篇文章的共性就是都首先指出了作者的结论！）
First of all, I would examine the actual number of traffic accidents that occurred before and after the speed limit increase and compare this to the size of the region and its driving population. （这里一样考虑的是人口数量，同时本文的作者还注意到了交通事故的数量的基数问题，就像我刚才在题目分析里指出的．）For example, if the Forestville region's driving population is 1 million people, and the traffic accidents for a 6-month period before the speed increase totaled 100, then the 15% increase would amount to an additional 16 traffic accidents, or 116 total. For a population of 1 million, there may be other solutions to this increase besides reducing the speed limit to what it was. (The comparison to the region of Elmsford would only be helpful if the regions driving demography is comparable in terms of size and scope.) A public education campaign emphasizing driver safety and safe driving techniques may suffice to reduce the number of traffic accidents. Especially considering that if the number of accidents relative to the population is somewhat small, it is a fairly safe driving population anyway.（这就是质疑结论的合理性）
In addition, I would consider lengthening the time of the study. Six months may be a relatively short period of time for which to study the rate of traffic accidents. Upon a closer examination of when the accidents occurred, one might ascertain that most of the driving accidents occurred within a month of raising the speed limit, but that there have been relatively few additional accidents since that first phase-in period. Lengthening the study to a one-year period would help adjust for any untypical statistics and paint a more accurate picture of the long-term affects of the speed limit increase.（关于调查时间的问题，指出调查的时间不够长使得得到的结论不可信）
I would also examine what else was occurring in the region during the period of the study. For example, was there a major highway construction project happening during this time which would have added to the unsafe nature of raod travel?（路况问题） Are there any alternative explanations for why the increase in traffic accidents could have occurred, or is the increase in speed limit the sole variable? Looking at the type of accidents that occurred, I would examine whether these are the types of car accidents one would expect from traveling at a faster speed to corroborate the cause and effect relationship.（这才是真正的实质，并不是所有的交通事故都是由超速引起的，这里削弱了速度限制和交通事故的联系）
As in the sample 6 essay, this writer sees some logic in assuming a connection between the higher speed limit in Forestville and the increase in auto accidents. Unlike the sample 6 essay, this response is neither as exhaustive in its analysis nor as impressively developed. The writer makes these points in the critique:
-- A statistical analysis might suggest that the 15% increase in
accidents is not as significant as it might seem.
-- A car safety education campaign might be a better way to solve the
-- A six month period might be too short a time on which to base major
-- Other factors could have caused the increase in accidents.
Although each of these points is developed and sensibly supported, the critique is not sufficiently full to warrant a score of 6. The essay demonstrates good control but not mastery of the elements of writing: it contains good variety in syntax, including effective use of rhetorical questions. The occasional flaws (e.g., the somewhat garbled syntax in paragraph 3: ".??爐ime for which to study the rate???") do not detract from the overall strong quality of the essay. For all of these reasons, this critique is strong but not outstanding, and thus merits a score of 5.
３． 最重要的一点，５分作文更多的是孤立的看待了作者的论据，没有把分析和原文作者的推理的思路联系起来，质疑的更多是论据和结论的本身，忽视了the line of reasoning,而６分作文几乎都是围绕着作者的思路来批驳的．