[a习作temp] 已解决 [复制链接]

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

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-7-30 20:06:14 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由 morgan918 于 2011-4-19 01:49 编辑

thanks

回应
0

使用道具举报

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

沙发

发表于 2007-7-30 20:19:08 |只看该作者

The editorial recommends a $10,000 raise in salary and a promotion to department chairperson of Professor Thomas. To support this recommendation the editorial cites that following facts about Professor Thomas: first, he receives high popularity among students. Second, he demonstrated a strong ability in search.（我总觉得“冒号：第一点。第二点。”这种方法不太好，你觉得呢？） Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend enough credible support to the claim.

In the first place, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between class’s size, popularity, and teaching abilities. Large classes’ size does not necessarily mean high popularity among students.（我觉得加一句分析会比较好，比如前面的句号改成逗号： ", without distinguishing core reqired course and the optional ones."） Perhaps Professor Thomas is teaching a core required course that every student must take. Moreover, large class size does not lead to strong teaching abilities either.（这里我觉得也要分析） Perhaps it is the easy coursework and high grading that attracts students, instead of the teaching abilities according to the assumptions of the arguer. If so, we cannot rely on it to predict the popularity of Professor Thomas and hence to judge his teaching abilities.

In the second place, bringing money grants that exceeded her salary into（？？） research project is little indication that Professor Thomas had excellent research abilities. Perhaps the money grants are simply due to the interrelationship skills of the professor. Or perhaps it is the research program’s profit itself that draw the companies’ investment, such as projects on product innovation. There are other possible reasons that may lead to the money grants other than the search abilities itself. Unless the author could rule out such possibilities, I simply cannot be convinced that her search skills deserved a promotion and a salary increase.

Even if Professor Thomas shows both her teaching and research abilities, what further weakens the argument is that the arguer oversimplified the case of promotion decision to department chairperson. Without consider other possible candidates as arguer had ignored, It is entirely possible that we may miss other candidates who perhaps are more suitable for this position than Professor Thomas. The flaw in this argument is the lacking of comparison between different possible candidates. Thus, the conclusion is based on unscientific methods. Therefore the conclusion which recommands a promotion and salary increase of Professor Thomas seems to be quite questionable.（合成一句话）
这一段我有一点疑问：究竟重点在Preventing the professor from leaving to other colleges, or which one to be promoted to the Chairperson? 我觉得应该是后者，如果你觉得这种Promotion decision be a oversimplified case，你的重点应该放在it should be irresponsible to promote a professor without considering other candidates just because the fright of her leaving.
另外，尾句提到了Salary increase，我觉得不合你的TS。

In sum, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the author would have to provide statistical survey evidence that Professor Thomas enjoy a popularity amough student. Also the arguer should give information about the recent search programs of Professor Thomas to demonstrate his search capability. Additionally, to make the conclusion logically acceptable, the arguer should also explain why Professor Thomas outperformed other possible candidates of this promotion.

我们写一样的题目，写成了一样的思路，只是你的用词和造句比我简洁有力多了。
留链接
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-712672-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 AlexInAW 于 2007-7-30 20:43 编辑 ]

GRE is hell.

使用道具举报