我今天細看了兩遍較難的6分范文，點評這篇如下:

　　It is unfortunate that todays educators place so much emphasis on finding out what students want to include in the curriculum and then giving it to them. It is the educators duty to determine the curriculum and the students duty to study what is presented to them.

　　題目的意思是，當今教育部門過于重視學生在課程設置中的決定作用，正確的做法是教育部門決定課程，學生的任務就是好好學習。

　　The statement above conceals intesting connotations far above curriculum development. Issues of classroom control and development of scholarly talents are at stake, not simply a debate over which books are acceptable or over revisionist histories.

　　開題表明課程設置是次要的，重要的是適當的課堂秩序以及培養學生的學術才能。這是一個典型的另起爐灶型的作文，提出issue題目中并不包含的觀點。

　　The statement itself is a bit misleading in that in my experience, student control over curriculum hardly existed. Each year, there were certain course offerings made available, and students were to choose from those offerings, of course bearing in mind requirements for graduation set forth by the administration. On a classroom level, the immediate, initial material may have been somewhat directed by the students, but this was a part of the process allowed by the teacher/professor insgroupsto gain the interest and attention of the students.

　　However, too much of any one thing becomes problematic;

　　letting students set the curriculum, as with letting students choose and design their own major in college, serves ultimately to dilute the quality of the educational experience unless a single advisor can devote significant amounts of time to the individual student. This amount of time, or even the expense to the student of this individual attention, seem to indicate that resources would be better allocated elsewhere.

　　后半截雖長，但意思只有一個，讓學生決定課程內容會造成教育質量的下降。

　　Of course, any school in which the students decide what goes is bound to have problems controlling students. Once the educators, be they administrators or teachers, are under the control of students, even a democratic situation would be like holding royalty acountable to the mob. Presently, students hear for hours that they should not forget to use a condom in the heat of the moment, and educators think the message gets through, while half the kids cant even remember to bring a pencil to class. Students go to school not to simply learn the Pythagorean theorem, but to learn direction and receive guidance. This cannot occur when students are in charge, and standards, already hard to find in Americas contemporary public schools, will become unenforceable. If students dictate and administrators do, students will never learn academic responsibility, and if they cant be held accountable for homework, what other responsibilities will they avoid when they get older?

　　這一段相對比較簡潔，通過舉例等方式，說明學生缺乏自主決定課程設置的能力，讓他們決定課程設置將使他們得不到direction and guidance.

　　But in another sense, teachers and students do exist in a partnership of sorts. Teachers are there to satisfy the needs of the student, and the student, while perhaps not being the most experienced/ knowledgeable person on what his/her needs actually are , at least should be afforded some say. In addition, we must remember what the purpose of education is, and that there are different levels of education.

　　這里才進入了作者準備論述的主要內容，即學生和老師應當是伙伴關系，而不該是誰強迫誰做什么。不過，后面加了個in addition,又強調了一下教育目的和不同層次教育的差別。扯進來的東西太多了！

　　In high school, the focus is not so much on learning actual material. The focus is on developing study habits, and on social interaction. The best secondary schools promote an environment in which individual creativity and pacing can be developed,swheresstudents are taught to think on their own, and learn to debate and argue in a scholarly way, through writing and other formal methods of discourse.sgroupscollaboration and interpersonal skills are developed and honed. The actual details of what is studied and tested is of less importance. Whether a student reads Maya Angelou, or Yeats, or Euripides essentially is beside the point as long as a students mind is cultivated, not just their ability to record and recite.

　　 What is important is that secondary students develop and grow in the hands of the professionals.

　　The secondary educational experience is designed to prepare a student for college. It is in collegeswheresthe individual learns to examine the world and how it works, and the individuals place in it.

　　As for duty, it is the educators duty not simply to determine the curriculum, but to present it effectively. They cannot half-heartedly paint it on the blackboard, they must enliven it and actually teach. Hard work must be lauded, while freeloaders are punished. These are the duties of teachers, and the duty of the students is not just to learn or study, but to grow. An independent mind is what students need, and that mind has to be in a position to want and be able to question beyond the material presented, not simply to question its legitimacy。

　　 That distinction,

　　though subtle, is the difference between letting the students follow a self-destructive course of premature self-determination on the one hand , and permitting on the other hand the fostering of great talents through a cooperative, mentoring relationship最后一句話非常費解，作者的意思可能是說，學生對校方提供的課程內容的質疑其實是一種盲目的早熟，會毀了學生的前途，而鼓勵學生的探索精神，獨立精神則只能由老師、學生的通力合作才能達到，呼應了本文的開頭，總結全文。

　　總體評價：

　　1，這篇文章的布局結構比較隨意，有幾處稍加改進，文章就好讀多了，而內容不會損害。這點不值得我們學習。

　　2，前半部分談學生決定課程的弊端，實際是同意了提干的說法。雖然論證有力，文筆精彩。但我個人覺得這一部分作用不大。因為作者本身就不同意學生決定課程現象的存在，說明在作者眼里，這個問題并不重要，那為什么還要花這么大篇幅論述該現象的弊端？難道作者擔心字數不夠？

　　3，精彩部分是第四段以后對教師與學生關系的論述。這里涉及到了很多作者對教育本質和目的的深刻見解。不少句子簡直就像格言一樣精粹、深刻。作者的思想源源不斷的涌出，感覺好像是文章的形式和字數限制束縛了思想的自由表達。剛開始讀時，以為作者跑題，但仔細研讀，會發現作者思維邏輯是嚴謹的，只不過由于形式的束縛，沒有明明白白的說出來，給讀者留下了思考的空間。文章最后一句非常有深度，不仔細體會，根本理解不了。作者肯定對哲學有著濃厚的興趣，要不然他怎么能在短時間內寫出這么深的句子？

　　4，關于語言，用詞非常精煉老到，句式變換隨心所欲。但是，我覺得個別句子有故意賣弄文采和假裝深沉之嫌，畢竟這篇文章的大部分內容還是比較平淡的，沒必要寫得像哲學著作。

　　結論：

　　1，這篇文章值得細讀至少3遍。

　　2，該文不值得我們模仿。一我們大多數人不具備這么強的語言把握能力，強行模仿它的風格可能會弄巧成拙。二是我們大多人還沒有這么深刻的觀察思考能力(大牛除外，學不了）。

　　3，一些精彩句子、閃光詞匯可以背下來，這因人而異。

　　我今天細看了兩遍較難的6分范文，點評這篇如下:

　　It is unfortunate that todays educators place so much emphasis on finding out what students want to include in the curriculum and then giving it to them. It is the educators duty to determine the curriculum and the students duty to study what is presented to them.

　　題目的意思是，當今教育部門過于重視學生在課程設置中的決定作用，正確的做法是教育部門決定課程，學生的任務就是好好學習。

　　The statement above conceals intesting connotations far above curriculum development. Issues of classroom control and development of scholarly talents are at stake, not simply a debate over which books are acceptable or over revisionist histories.

　　開題表明課程設置是次要的，重要的是適當的課堂秩序以及培養學生的學術才能。這是一個典型的另起爐灶型的作文，提出issue題目中并不包含的觀點。

　　The statement itself is a bit misleading in that in my experience, student control over curriculum hardly existed. Each year, there were certain course offerings made available, and students were to choose from those offerings, of course bearing in mind requirements for graduation set forth by the administration. On a classroom level, the immediate, initial material may have been somewhat directed by the students, but this was a part of the process allowed by the teacher/professor insgroupsto gain the interest and attention of the students.

　　However, too much of any one thing becomes problematic;

　　letting students set the curriculum, as with letting students choose and design their own major in college, serves ultimately to dilute the quality of the educational experience unless a single advisor can devote significant amounts of time to the individual student. This amount of time, or even the expense to the student of this individual attention, seem to indicate that resources would be better allocated elsewhere.

　　后半截雖長，但意思只有一個，讓學生決定課程內容會造成教育質量的下降。

　　Of course, any school in which the students decide what goes is bound to have problems controlling students. Once the educators, be they administrators or teachers, are under the control of students, even a democratic situation would be like holding royalty acountable to the mob. Presently, students hear for hours that they should not forget to use a condom in the heat of the moment, and educators think the message gets through, while half the kids cant even remember to bring a pencil to class. Students go to school not to simply learn the Pythagorean theorem, but to learn direction and receive guidance. This cannot occur when students are in charge, and standards, already hard to find in Americas contemporary public schools, will become unenforceable. If students dictate and administrators do, students will never learn academic responsibility, and if they cant be held accountable for homework, what other responsibilities will they avoid when they get older?

　　這一段相對比較簡潔，通過舉例等方式，說明學生缺乏自主決定課程設置的能力，讓他們決定課程設置將使他們得不到direction and guidance.

　　But in another sense, teachers and students do exist in a partnership of sorts. Teachers are there to satisfy the needs of the student, and the student, while perhaps not being the most experienced/ knowledgeable person on what his/her needs actually are , at least should be afforded some say. In addition, we must remember what the purpose of education is, and that there are different levels of education.

　　這里才進入了作者準備論述的主要內容，即學生和老師應當是伙伴關系，而不該是誰強迫誰做什么。不過，后面加了個in addition,又強調了一下教育目的和不同層次教育的差別。扯進來的東西太多了！

　　In high school, the focus is not so much on learning actual material. The focus is on developing study habits, and on social interaction. The best secondary schools promote an environment in which individual creativity and pacing can be developed,swheresstudents are taught to think on their own, and learn to debate and argue in a scholarly way, through writing and other formal methods of discourse.sgroupscollaboration and interpersonal skills are developed and honed. The actual details of what is studied and tested is of less importance. Whether a student reads Maya Angelou, or Yeats, or Euripides essentially is beside the point as long as a students mind is cultivated, not just their ability to record and recite.

　　 What is important is that secondary students develop and grow in the hands of the professionals.

　　The secondary educational experience is designed to prepare a student for college. It is in collegeswheresthe individual learns to examine the world and how it works, and the individuals place in it.

　　As for duty, it is the educators duty not simply to determine the curriculum, but to present it effectively. They cannot half-heartedly paint it on the blackboard, they must enliven it and actually teach. Hard work must be lauded, while freeloaders are punished. These are the duties of teachers, and the duty of the students is not just to learn or study, but to grow. An independent mind is what students need, and that mind has to be in a position to want and be able to question beyond the material presented, not simply to question its legitimacy。

　　 That distinction,

　　though subtle, is the difference between letting the students follow a self-destructive course of premature self-determination on the one hand , and permitting on the other hand the fostering of great talents through a cooperative, mentoring relationship最后一句話非常費解，作者的意思可能是說，學生對校方提供的課程內容的質疑其實是一種盲目的早熟，會毀了學生的前途，而鼓勵學生的探索精神，獨立精神則只能由老師、學生的通力合作才能達到，呼應了本文的開頭，總結全文。

　　總體評價：

　　1，這篇文章的布局結構比較隨意，有幾處稍加改進，文章就好讀多了，而內容不會損害。這點不值得我們學習。

　　2，前半部分談學生決定課程的弊端，實際是同意了提干的說法。雖然論證有力，文筆精彩。但我個人覺得這一部分作用不大。因為作者本身就不同意學生決定課程現象的存在，說明在作者眼里，這個問題并不重要，那為什么還要花這么大篇幅論述該現象的弊端？難道作者擔心字數不夠？

　　3，精彩部分是第四段以后對教師與學生關系的論述。這里涉及到了很多作者對教育本質和目的的深刻見解。不少句子簡直就像格言一樣精粹、深刻。作者的思想源源不斷的涌出，感覺好像是文章的形式和字數限制束縛了思想的自由表達。剛開始讀時，以為作者跑題，但仔細研讀，會發現作者思維邏輯是嚴謹的，只不過由于形式的束縛，沒有明明白白的說出來，給讀者留下了思考的空間。文章最后一句非常有深度，不仔細體會，根本理解不了。作者肯定對哲學有著濃厚的興趣，要不然他怎么能在短時間內寫出這么深的句子？

　　4，關于語言，用詞非常精煉老到，句式變換隨心所欲。但是，我覺得個別句子有故意賣弄文采和假裝深沉之嫌，畢竟這篇文章的大部分內容還是比較平淡的，沒必要寫得像哲學著作。

　　結論：

　　1，這篇文章值得細讀至少3遍。

　　2，該文不值得我們模仿。一我們大多數人不具備這么強的語言把握能力，強行模仿它的風格可能會弄巧成拙。二是我們大多人還沒有這么深刻的觀察思考能力(大牛除外，學不了）。

　　3，一些精彩句子、閃光詞匯可以背下來，這因人而異。