V1(BY: kevinzhang717 ) 俩高中，一个(叫什么SCH,缩写)offer200种课程， 另外一个是普通的local 高中，offer80种课程， 然后呢这个local的高中每年能培养很多人去读大学(比SCH多)，然后呢这个SCH就说他们计划减少一半的课程，说是这样做能提高学校的performance，而且少交TAX，多赚钱。
The following appeared in an editorial from a newspaper serving the town of Saluda.
“The Saluda Consolidated High School offers over 200 different courses from which its students can choose. A much smaller private school down the street offers a basic curriculum of only 80 different courses, but it consistently sends a higher proportion of its graduating seniors on to college than Consolidated do. By eliminating at least half of the courses offered there and focusing on a basic curriculum, we could improve student performance at Consolidated and also save many tax dollars.”(此题没有中文翻译和Flaw，自己补上的，大家可以讨论一下哈)
In this editorial the author recommends that Saluda’s Consolidated High School eliminate half of its 200 courses and focus primarily on basic curriculum in order to improve student performance and save tax revenues. The author’s recommendation is problematic for several reasons.
To begin with, the author assumes that the only relevant difference between Consolidated and the private school is the number of courses offered by each. However, other relevant differences between the schools might account for the difference in the proportion of their graduates who go on to college. For example, the private school’s students might be selected from a pool of gifted or exceptional students, or might have to meet rigorous admission standards whereas Consolidated’s students might be drawn from the community at large with little or no qualification for admission.
Next, the author assumes that the proportion of students who go on to college is an overall measure of student performance. While this is a tempting assumption, its truth is by no means obvious. If student excellence is narrowly defined in terms of the student’s ability to gain access to college, this assumption is somewhat reasonable. However, given a broader conception of student excellence that takes into account student’s ability to learn and apply their knowledge to new situations, it is not obvious that college admission is reliable indicator of performance. For example, students in non-academic disciplines could conceivably perform at high levels within these disciplines but nevertheless be unable to meet college admission standards.
Finally, the author assumes that savings in tax revenues will result from the reduced costs of funding the paired-down curriculum. This is not necessarily true. For example, it could turn out that both programs serve the same number of students and require the same number of classrooms and teacher.
In conclusion, the author has not made a convincing case for the recommendation to eliminate courses at Consolidated and focus on a basic curriculum. To strengthen the conclusion the author would have to provide evidence that Consolidated and the private school were sufficiently similar to warrant the analogy between them. Moreover, the relationship between student performance and college admission and the mechanism whereby savings in tax revenues would be accomplished would have to be clarified.