| |
| |
|
Both lecture and reading hold different positions, respectively, on the issue of instrumental musical courses. The lecture's argument is formed around many points that are in direct contrast to the material in the reading passage.
First of all, the reading passage mentions that having instrumental music classes is time consuming for students, and it is better to use their time for more important subjects. However, the lecture's argument rebuts this by claiming that education should be full balanced. Also, he says that it would be helpful to have music classes for math and English. This is because, they can improve their thinking, and distinguish different sound by learning that.
Second, the reading passage says that it wastes money due to expensive instruments. On the other hand, the lecture's argument refutes this by arguing that there are volunteers to teach students for free, and schools can get instruments by donating or used instruments in lower price.
Finally, the reading passage points out that there are few students who have the talent to be a musician. In contrast, the lecture's argument counters this by claiming that students can express their feeling and be more creative through these courses. Moreover, they may not recognize their talent at first, but later, they could become a great artists like Beethoven or Mozart.
In conclusion, the reading passage represents three aspects with regards to music classes for instruments. However, the lecture's argument makes it clear none of these characteristic justify the reading passage's claim.