求mpromanus改

hi_avivaUID：2876389

求改
A/D：Colleges or Universities should offer more courses to prepare students for the future before they start working.

Let’s reconsider the old belief that courses provided by universities should be limited to the major field of a student. Yes, it is true that narrow scope of courses help students save their energy and better concentrate on their own majors. Does this mean colleges or universities have no need to provide students with more courses for their future? I doubt it. Honestly, it’s just a short-sighted view. It’s beginning to seem truer to say that more courses will be expected to lead to lasting benefits to students.

First and foremost, a wide range of courses provide students with an easy access to select their own interested majors, which they have to strive after the rest of their life. For a college student who, perhaps common, has no idea about his interested field, it is arbitrary for him to choose a major subject without making a carefully comparison after attending several lectures of various fields. Hence, a myriad of courses are essential. College students, in this way, will not only broaden their outlook and mature their thoughts, but also extend their potential in certain academic areas. To look for better illustration, one can look no further than the universities in America. With courses in various branches of subjects both in art and science provided, American universities, including those world-class schools like Yale and Cornell, encourage the student to attend as many classes as they can in their fresh year to seek what his interest is.

Also noteworthy is that students may easily find a satisfactory job when they are haunting for jobs. In this fast-changing society, a paper-made diploma no longer means an “iron rice bowl”-a secure job, which calls for educators’ awareness about how to do a better job at preparing students for the workforce. Accordingly, in order to improve the competitiveness in the severe job market, students should attend more courses instead of simply confining to their own majors. Specifically, with courses aimed at fostering social skills such as teamwork ability and communication, students are able to adapt to the working place as well as handle problem they come across effectively and efficiently. What’s more, practical classes are needed to narrow the gap between academic and the real world, thus students will be fully employable and start to work instantly.

In a word, ensuring that students choose the job they like, to which is added the skills they needed when finding jobs, makes the claim that students should be provided with more courses in universities both cogent and reasonable. Students, indeed, could find it much easier to make the transition from full time education to working life.

mpromanusUID：2565872

A/D：Colleges or Universities should offer more courses to prepare students for the future before they start working.

Let’s reconsider the old belief that courses provided by universities should be limited to the major field of a student. Yes, it is true that a narrow scope of courses help students save their energy and better concentrate on their own majors. Does this mean colleges or universities have no need to provide students with more courses for their future? (I don't see why courses 'limited to the major' cannot be courses 'for their future'. If you study, say, computer science, then Java programming would be both very relevant to your major as well as to your future job, yes? You've just made a point that is based on the assumption that courses 'limited to the major' and courses 'for their future' are different, but this assumption itself is unfounded because you didn't really properly define what kind of courses count as 'for their future' and what count as 'limited to the major'.) I doubt it. Honestly, it’s just a short-sighted view. It’s beginning to seem truer to say that more courses will be expected to lead to lasting benefits (Again, this doesn't really have much argument power because you give no definition of what kind of courses qualify as 'lead to lasting benefits'. Why do you need to do this? Because this is not common knowledge like 'the Earth is round'. What counts as 'courses leading to lasting benefits' varies from person to person. If you don't set the definition for your discussion, your readers are then free to interpret the question with their own definitions and challenge your argument right from the start – which means your arguments will be rather weak.) to students.

First and foremost, a wide range of courses provide students with an easy access to select their own interested majors (You can't just literally translate 他们感兴趣的. People are 'interested IN' things, and things can only be 'interesting'. What you want to express is 'major of interest'. ), which they have to strive after the rest of their life (Most people actually don't end up working in the major that they studied in.). For a college student who, perhaps commonly, has no idea about his interested field, it is arbitrary for him to choose a major subject without making a carefully comparison after attending several lectures of various fields. Hence, a myriad of courses are essential. College students, in this way, will not only broaden their outlook and mature their thoughts, but also extend their potential in certain academic areas. To look for a better illustration, one can look no further than the universities in America. With courses in various branches of subjects both in arts and science provided, American universities, including those world-class schools like Yale and Cornell, encourage the students to attend as many classes as they can in their freshman year to seek what his interest is.(Yeah, whatever American universities do are good. But, this example only asserts that universities have a lot of courses, and does not testify that students 'broaden their outlook, etc.' in this system. Your logic is basically drifting along a line like this: major lasts for life -> more courses, more choices, more chance of hitting a major of interest -> more courses are good -> American universities have many courses..and in the drift you end up only focusing on part of the entire picture, that is, 'more courses'. In order to make this example work, you need to bring it back to the starting topic, that offering these many courses do prepare students better for the future. This is what's called 点题.)

Also noteworthy is that students may easily find a satisfactory job when they are haunting for jobs. In this fast-changing society, a paper-made diploma (1. if something is paper-made, it is made BY paper, as in, the paper has life and made that something, not that it is made OF paper..2. of course a diploma is not made of paper..only a diploma certificate is..) no longer means an “iron rice bowl”-a secure job, which calls for educators’ awareness about how to do a better job at preparing students for the workforce. Accordingly, in order to improve the competitiveness in the severe job market, students should attend more courses instead of simply confining to their own majors. Specifically, with courses aimed at fostering social skills such as teamwork ability and communication, students are able to adapt to the working place as well as handle problems they come across effectively and efficiently. What’s more, practical classes are needed to narrow the gap between academic and the real world, thus students will be fully employable and start to work instantly.(Good. But what if the student wants to continue in the academia? Does your argument about narrowing the gap between the academic life and the real world remain as strong? Why must the academia be necessarily assumed to be different from 'the real world'? What kind of a world do you mean by 'the real world', anyway? Think about it :))

In a word, ensuring that students choose the job they like, to which are added the skills they needed when finding jobs, makes the claim that students should be provided with more courses in universities both cogent and reasonable. Students, indeed, could find it much easier to make the transition from full time education to working life.

总结：

语法用词语言神马的都很好，但是论述上稍嫌松动，一个是用例子没有点题 – 你的例子只说明了学校开课多这个现象的存在，但并没有明确地指出这种现象实际上对学生的未来造成了影响，所以你的例子实际上并没有完全证明你的第一个论点。。另外一个是很多人写教育类题目都会有的假设，就是学术生活必定和所谓的real world对立，高等教育的学生必定都是要出来找工作的blah blah。。当然这个假设是合理的，因为它的确对大多数人来说，尤其对大多数的中国学生来说，是正确的，但是，因为它毕竟不是100%正确，导致你的论述很容易被反驳，不严谨。如果你愿意进一步提高自己论述的严谨程度，可以试试多问几个‘我为什么这样想’。。:)