Repairing Arguments

When given an argument that doesn't make sense, the book suggests adding premises or a conclusion if the already bad argument can meet the following three criterium...
*The argument becomes strnger or valid
*The premise is plausible and would seem plausible to the other person
*The premise is more plausible than the conclusion

Lets take a look at this example...

You shouldn't watch tv that much because then you won't get any homework done.

I think this conclusion is set and in order to be supported, needs to have a premise like "television can become distracting and can be a distraction from completeing homework." Then the conclusion should be rewritten as "Television is distracting and something distracting can keep you preoccupied from accomplishing a chore, homework, or any other kind of obligation." By adding this premise and changing the conclusion, the argument becomes stronger and can now be supported by other evidence such as maybe the subject has been distracted before by television and has not done their homework. Thw rewritten conclusion can now be supported by evidence compared t the previous conclusion.

Here is the rewritten argument.

Television can be a distraction from other priorities such as homework. It is advised not to watch television at the same time as doing homework because doing both at the same time can prolong getting obligations done.

This argument is stronger than the original, and is more valid because it can be substantiated.