What are the premises in the following argument on public schools?
What is the conclusion?
How do you remove emotive language and rhetorical questions from the argument?
Are there any logical fallacies (fault in reasoning)?
Here is the argument in its original form. "Lack of money is not the problem with public schools.
Just the opposite: the more they get, the worse they become.
The Left keeps wanting more money for schools.
Conservatives are considered to be against education.
However, since the horrible schools in Washington, D.C. receive 2.8 times as much money per student as California schools, it is reasonable to believe that matching that level would also drop performance to that level. Ugh.
The teacher’s unions and the bureaucrats have created the current mess, and the only way out is to privatize all California schools.
It is a simple choice: do we care more about children or about unions and bureaucracy?"

Solution Preview

This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.


1. If public schools increase funding per student then the performance level of the students will decrease.
2. Decreases in student performance in public schools is due to an increase in the amount of money allocated per student....

This is only a preview of the solution. Please use the purchase button to see the entire solution


or $1 if you
register a new account!

Assisting Tutor

Related Homework Solutions

Get help from a qualified tutor
Live Chats