The following appeared in a letter to the school board in the town of Centerville."All students should be required to take the driver's education course at Centerville High School. In the past two years, several accidents in and around Centerville have in

In this argument, the author claims that taking the driver's education course at Centerville High School is the only solution to the serious safe problem of students. His conclusion is based on several accidents in and around Centerville concerning teenagers, complaints from parents about their limited time to teach their children to drive as well as tight budgets of families to afford the driving instruction in the other two driving schools. Nonetheless, this argument rests on several unwarranted assumptions that seriously undermine the cogency of its conclusion.

The author mentions several accidents that occurred in and around Centerville and involved teenage drivers can reflect severe safety problem in this region. It is apparently assumed that the teenage drivers’ lack of skills and knowledge is the very cause of these accidents. However, he should not neglect the possibility that teenagers are merely the victims instead of the perpetrators. Besides, the causes of those accidents might not be their lacking of driving skills but the ignorance of legislation or their innate belligerence which can hardly be modified. Therefore more detailed condition of those accidents ought to be presented so that the safety problem of teenage drivers in Centerville could be better analyzed.

Even if Centerville does have serious problems of teenage drivers, the author should not attribute the obligation of teaching them to drive to other instructions considering their parents’ complaints. He obviously supposes that instructions of driving school is the prime choice based on the facts. Yet there are probably superior alternative solutions. For instance, parents can spare time at weekends to coach their children and promulgate their relationship instead of partying with their friends. Besides, families living in the same community can invite experienced drivers in that region to teach teenagers driving skills. Thus the author should provide more convincing explanation concerning the preclusion of other solutions.

Even though parents can not figure out the solution of teaching their children to drive, the author’s repudiation of the advantages of driving schools seems unfounded. It is clearly indicated that families on a tight budget cannot afford the driving instructions and therefore driving schools’ prices tend to be too high for all the families to pay. Nevertheless, no one can doubt that these schools might be both economical and convenient. For example, they will pay only 100 dollars to coached as a qualified driver. In this case most parents are capable of affording it except for those impoverished ones and the impeachable opportunity should never be degraded rashly. So more cogent evidence is needed to illustrate the financial drawbacks of driving schools that leads parents to the high schools.

To sum up, this argument suggests the program sponsored by the high school as the only solution to the serious safety problem concerning teenage drivers. Nonetheless, the author bases his conclusion on some unfounded assumptions that cast doubts on its reasonability, which requires more careful illustrations.