分析：

显然，这篇文章在各方面都比上一篇差，但它还是基本达到了一篇好作文的要求，可以得4分。

从结构上看，该文有5个段落。作者在开头提出了自己的立场，即反对生产耐久产品，在正文展开了分析，有一个结尾，不过这结尾有些匆忙、含糊。该文在结构上的一个主要缺陷在于没有一个开头段落将读者引入正文，而是一开始就切入正题，显得有些突然。

从论证上看，该文对自己的立场进行了支持。首先，作者分析生产耐久产品可能导致成本和价格上升，从而形成购买者减少的恶性循环；其次，作者指出非耐久产品可能因低价而畅销，并主要从消费者心理的角度论证低价批量产品可能更有市场。该文在论证上的缺点是没有提出具体的事例或数据来支持自己的观点，因而全篇说理显得有些抽象。

该文在语言方面有不少错误。如：在下面这个句子中it is most often the case the building a product to last forever will indeed cost more than the average consumer is willing to pay,定冠词the要么去掉，要么改成that。再如，replace old products with new product，应为replace old products with new products。这类小毛病还有不少，但该文的语言总体通顺，合乎写作规范。

这篇文章共有380字。

Student Essay略

Revised Essay

Based upona survey among workers that indicates a high level of interest in the topic of corporate restructuring and redesigning of benefits programs,the arguer concludes thatsince 79 percent of the 1200 workers who responded to the survey expressed interest in these topics, the notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is incorrect.The reasoning in this argument is problematic in several respects.

First, the survey itself is open to question.The argument does not indicate how the nearly 1200 workers were selected.Ifthe workers were selected by voluntary participation instead of random sampling, then there is the possibility that these voluntary workers tend to care more about management issues. In this case, the representativeness of the sample is problematic.In addition, the statistics cited in the editorial may be misleading because the total number of workers employed by the corporation is not specified.For example,ifthe corporation employs 200,000 workers, the fact that 79 percent of the nearly 1200 respondents showed interest in these topics provides strong support for the conclusion.On the other hand, if the corporation employs 200,000 workers, the conclusion would be much weaker.Furthermore, the survey does not involve workers of other companies throughout the country.

Another problem with the argument is thatit makes a hasty generalization about the types of issues that workers are interested in.It accords with common sense that workers would be interested in corporate restructuring and redesigning of benefits programs, since these issues affect workers very directly.However,it is unfair to assume thatworkers would be similarly interested in other management issues, ones that do not affect them or affect them less directly.

In conclusion,this argument is not convincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the arguer would have to show thatthe respondents account for a significant and representative portion of all workers.Additionally,the arguer must provide evidenceto prove that workers do have general interest in other management topics-not just those affect them directly.

6. There is an element of truth in this argument (statement) but is ignores a deeper and more (important/essential) fact (reason) that…