[a习作temp] Argument140 限时太长等于没限，照旧有拍必回 [复制链接]

AlexInAW
UID：2349849

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 151
注册时间: 2007-6-14
精华: 0
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-7-30 20:18:00 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TOPIC: ARGUMENT140 - The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.
"During her seventeen years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas' demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion, we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college."

WORDS: 554 TIME: 01:08:42 DATE: 2007-7-30 19:46:13

It is recommended that Professor Thomas receive a $10,000 raise in salary and a promotion to Department Chairperson. To support the recommendation, the arguer emphasized the size of Prof. Thomas's classes and the cash flow her research projects had brought in, which are said to be indicating her teaching and research abilities respectively. Moreover, the argument also indicates a possibility of Prof. Thomas's leaving for another college, making the salary raise and status promotion must and urgent. However convincing it seems, the statement suffers several critical fallacies, which flaw the line of arguing.

In the first place, large classes alone do not indicate outstanding teaching abilities. As a common sense, college students do not usually have the right to choose whatever curriculum they wish to take, and take it accordingly. It could be suspected that Prof. Thomas's courses are mostly imposed to the students, thus indicating irrelevance of large classes with her popularity. Further more, even a large number of students do wish to choose her classes, the conclusion of great teaching ability still needs the proof of what students had truly learned. For instance, if her classes show no significance except "easy to pass", then her seemingly high popularity should not be accounted to her ability in teaching.

In the second place, the money she brought in by her research grants does not indicate excellence in researching. After all, what truly reflects a professor's ability to do research is the quality and quantity of the articles he/she publishes, and the prizes or awards already gained. On the other hand, considering only money brought in, one could easily mistake a professor with a business researcher. In such circumstance, Prof. Thomas might be just the later one, if all her achievements are marketable but not valuable in an academic prospect. Thus, simply making conclusion based on cash flow is fallacious, and it will be misleading and hazardous to the academic atmosphere of the university.

What further weakens the argument is the oversimplified conclusion it made, recommending a salary raise and a promotion, while taking into no account of the situation of other professors and universities. For the conclusion is based on the probability of Prof. Thomas's leaving for another college due to dissatisfaction of her salary or position, further comparison should be carried out before any statement is finally made. For example, if the current wage level in this university is one of the highest, it would be dispensable to increase the wage simply for the fright that the person might leave. Also, the wage level of other professors and their contributions should be take into account. If Prof. Thomas is already receiving one of the highest wages in the university, then simply raising her salary will be unacceptable in the eyes of others. Situation will be similar if the professors receiving identical wages contribute more to the university, when it is also unwise to give her promotion to the Department Chairperson.

To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands, for the false analysis it made to conclude the professor's excellence in teaching/research abilities, and the oversimplification of the conclusion without considering situations of other professors or in other universities. These fallacies will, if further analysis fortifying the argument are not made, will render the statement unconvincing to any audience it faces.

GRE is hell.

回应
0

使用道具举报

morgan918
UID：2320343

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 5
寄托币: 678
注册时间: 2007-3-27
精华: 0
帖子: 9

沙发

发表于 2007-7-30 20:43:45 |只看该作者

It is recommended that Professor Thomas receive a $10,000 raise in salary and a promotion to Department Chairperson. To support the recommendation, the arguer emphasized the size of Prof. Thomas's classes and the cash flow her research projects had brought in, which are said to be indicating her teaching and research abilities respectively. 这里写得比我科学，用了said to be,而我错误地用了fact . Moreover, the argument also indicates a possibility of Prof. Thomas's leaving for another college, making the salary raise and status promotion must and urgent. However convincing it seems, the statement suffers several critical fallacies, which flaw the line of arguing.

In the first place, large classes alone do not indicate outstanding teaching abilities. As a common sense, college students do not usually have the right to choose whatever curriculum they wish to take, and take it accordingly. It could be suspected that Prof. Thomas's courses are mostly imposed to the students, thus indicating irrelevance of large classes with her popularity. Further more, even a large number of students do wish to choose her classes, the conclusion of great teaching ability still needs the proof of what students had truly learned. For instance, if her classes show no significance except "easy to pass", then her seemingly high popularity should not be accounted to her ability in teaching.
这段跟我差不多……没什么可说

In the second place, the money she brought in by her research grants does not indicate excellence in researching. After all, what truly reflects a professor's ability to do research is the quality and quantity of the articles he/she publishes, and the prizes or awards already gained. On the other hand, considering only money brought in, one could easily mistake a professor with a business researcher. In such circumstance, Prof. Thomas might be just the later one, if all her achievements are marketable but not valuable in an academic prospect. Thus, simply making conclusion based on cash flow is fallacious, and it will be misleading and hazardous to the academic atmosphere of the university.这句对批驳没什么作用吧

这一段我有所保留。没切中要害。。可以在讨论。

What further weakens the argument is the oversimplified conclusion it made, recommending a salary raise and a promotion, while taking into no account of the situation of other professors and universities. For the conclusion is based on the probability of Prof. Thomas's leaving for another college due to dissatisfaction of her salary or position, further comparison should be carried out before any statement is finally made. For example, if the current wage level in this university is one of the highest, it would be dispensable to increase the wage simply for the fright that the person might leave. Also, the wage level of other professors and their contributions should be take into account. If Prof. Thomas is already receiving one of the highest wages in the university, then simply raising her salary will be unacceptable in the eyes of others. Situation will be similar if the professors receiving identical wages contribute more to the university, when it is also unwise to give her promotion to the Department Chairperson.
这段也不错
To sum up, the argument is not persuasive as it stands, for the false analysis it made to conclude the professor's excellence in teaching/research abilities, and the oversimplification of the conclusion without considering situations of other professors or in other universities. These fallacies will, if further analysis fortifying the argument are not made, will render the statement unconvincing to any audience it faces.
是不是结尾要提出如何的further information才能推出作者的结论呢？我所见到的北美和孙远是由这部分的。

使用道具举报