CORRINA TAN LI YING
TUTORIAL GROUP 4
U1431032J
HW0101 ASSIGNMENT 1

In an age of technological advancement and prevalence, conservative tutors have swiftly

banned the face of laptop in classrooms (Daniel Rockmore’s The Case for Banning Laptops

in the Classroom, 2014). This has sparked off the debate on whether laptops should still be

used in classrooms. Rebecca Schuman is for it and presents her case well. However, when it

comes to presenting arguments of critics, they become poor. Yet, on deeper analysis, this

might be her strategy to present weak counter-arguments in favor of hers.

Her attempt to present possible counter-argument is weak. She was unable to make clear

claims to present her stand towards these oppositions (paragraph …show more content…
This can be portrayed by Rockmore’s insistence that benefits of laptops are

“negligible at best” even though he has not tested it “for years”. Similarly, “Cornell’s 2003

landmark study” has been outdated. Hence, both examples have time lag and are less

relevant and reliable in the time of publication when laptops have rapidly evolved over

these years. In addition, studies taken in “UCLA and Princeton”, despite their prestigious

reputation, are still poor in validity because it only reflects on the ineffectiveness of laptops

to the world’s minority of smartest students; instead of the average majority students. Thus,

by using this invalid example, the argument is making generalizations, which undermines

her argument. On top of that, the presence of oxymoron in the example where students

“learn better” in “old fashioned chicken scratches” greatly presents logical flaws as the

value of these notes is then questionable. Therefore, the presence of another weak example

makes the entire argument less reliable and convincing. Hence, Schuman’s argument is not

solid due to lack of validity, reliability and claim.

Furthermore, these flaws are more obvious in paragraph 4. Previously (in paragraph 3),