交作业， Argument140

hychlavenderUID: 2697566

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: 475
TIME: 45:00:00
DATE: 2010/1/28 12:05:50

Absence of the meticulous scrutiny, the recommendation to raise Professor Thomas's salary and range a promotion in her department seems to be plausible especially supported by the evidence about her scale of class and the research she brought. However, through a more critical perspective, we may find several unsubstantial assumptions and logical flaws which render this recommendation unconvincing.

To begin with, the author of the report unfairly equates the scale of one's classes with her popularity in university. It make sense to regard the scale of classes as an indicator to assess one teacher's popularity, yet it is not the only one. It is entirely possible that the largest classes at the university is just the result of lacking suitable teachers like Professor Thomas to taking certain courses, she has no choice but to take this large scale of classes. Without taking into consideration other possible explanations for the popularity of Professor Thomas's classes, her popularity among Elm City University may not be warranted, let alone the evaluation to her teaching ability.

In the following place, the argument is weakened by the mere fact that the quantity of the money she fetched for research grant is surpassing her salary. Absence of other professors' condition, it is too hasty to draw any conclusion lacking necessary comparison. Perhaps the average level of gaining money for research from majority of professors in EC University is much higher than Prof. Thomas. Even if accepting that the larger research grant is brought by her as validity, we cannot be convinced that her research ability is also enjoying high standard. No information is provided involving the correlation between the quantity of research money and research ability. Thus, if the author wants to use this fact as a strong supporter for his conclusion, more detail evidence about the research grant and research itself should be offered, otherwise, it would lend no endorsement for the final recommendation.

Finally, the author ignores the possibility that even with the higher level of salary and promotion provided, Professor Thomas will leave EC any way. Only considering the pecuniary and official aspects would not be enough, more other critical and subtle points should be taken into account. Perhaps she wants to leave current university due to the family's migration to other countries. If so, the recommendation aiming to keep Prof. Thomas takes into no effect.

In conclusion, the committee's recommendation is ill-founded. To better illustrate Professor Thomas as a good teacher, clear evidence and the voice of students for the teaching of her classes should be offered. Equally, specific evidence to demonstrate the Professor's research ability should be present with clear description. Finally, the most important task for committee is to clearly define the reasons for Thomas' leaving, and find out whether it is enough to make she stayed with only higher salary and the chairman position.

hychlavenderUID: 2697566

麻烦HEPBURN同学尽快在大贴中开贴，我好及时进行作文的修改~

daidarenUID: 2354215

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: 475
TIME: 45:00:00
DATE: 2010/1/28 12:05:50

Absence of the meticulous scrutiny, the recommendation to raise Professor Thomas's salary and range a promotion in her department seems to be plausible especially supported by the evidence about her scale of class and the research she brought. However, through a more critical perspective, we may find several unsubstantial assumptions and logical flaws which render this recommendation unconvincing. （这样儿的开头。。头一次见）

To begin with, the author of the report unfairly equates the scale of one's classes with her popularity in university. It make sense to regard the scale of classes as an indicator to assess one（a） teacher's popularity, yet it is not the only one. It is entirely possible that the largest classes at the university is just the result of lacking suitable teachers like Professor Thomas to taking （take）certain courses, she has no choice but to take this large scale of classes. Without taking into consideration other possible explanations for the popularity of Professor Thomas's classes, her popularity among Elm City University may not be warranted, let alone the evaluation to her teaching ability.（感觉这一段不是层层深入的，一直抓着一个问题，有点强词夺理的感觉。个人觉得可以把）

In the following place, the argument is weakened by the mere fact that the quantity of the money she fetched for research grant is surpassing her salary. Absence of other professors' condition, it is too hasty to draw any conclusion lacking necessary comparison. Perhaps the average level of gaining money for research from majority of professors in EC University is much higher than Prof. Thomas. Even if accepting that the larger research grant is brought by her as validity, we cannot be convinced that her research ability is also enjoying high standard. No information is provided involving the correlation between the quantity of research money and research ability. Thus, if the author wants to use this fact as a strong supporter for his conclusion, more detail evidence about the research grant and research itself should be offered, otherwise, it would lend no endorsement for the final recommendation. （这个点我觉得不是谬误吧~因为这个观点里面是纵向比的，professor T跟自己比，学校从他身上来说是盈利的，所以觉得他好没什么不对啊~至少这个点不是主要的谬误）

Finally, the author ignores the possibility that even with the higher level of salary and promotion provided, Professor Thomas will leave EC any way. Only considering the pecuniary and official aspects would not be enough（is not enough 原来那样是Chinglish哈）, more other（去掉） critical and subtle points should be taken into account. Perhaps she wants to leave current university due to the family's migration to other countries（这些例子挺牵强的，不够典型啊，觉得说的有关学术的话 更有说服力，比如“给钱不如把研究设备提高档次”之类的）. If so, the recommendation aiming to keep Prof. Thomas takes into no effect（有这种用法吗。。）.

In conclusion, the committee's recommendation is ill-founded. To better illustrate Professor Thomas as a good teacher, （原文的论断是怕T走掉，不是要说明他是个好老师，结尾段写出这点你就默认文章有俩论断了，每篇ARGU的论断会有一个）clear evidence and the voice of students for the teaching of her classes should be offered. Equally, specific evidence to demonstrate the Professor's research ability should be present with clear description. Finally, the most important task for committee is to clearly define the reasons for Thomas' leaving, and find out whether it is enough to make she stayed with only higher salary and the chairman position.
（结尾的形式应该不是这样的吧，结尾的要素我给你贴一段范文怎么样~ In summary, even though the assertion presented by the author appears reasonable, no further suggestions could be put forward until the author provide us with adequate and solid evidence to eliminate all the possibilities about the recommendation and substantiate the survey scientifically.红色是模板。这个是比较简单的 多的话可以写作者的谬误+改进方法。。。多看看牛人的范文就熟了。。我也说不好~）


感觉你还没把我住重点，尤其是找到谬误后面得逻辑关系。
1.        T为什么会走？ 未给出证据，（没别的学校要他，他不想走。。。）
2.        T不一定有那么好，重点是可能不值那多出来的1W刀，也可能不适合做DC，或者压根儿不想做DC。。
3.        即使想走也不一定价钱就能挡得住。。提高科研环境之类的更重要什么的~。。

仅供参考。。

45分钟写了那么长说明您手快~这是优势啊。。现在的关键是多认真审题，看看网上的谬误全分析再下笔。多练两篇就好了~。。改的累死了。。看的困死了。。我先睡觉了。。我有啥没说清楚的明天在讨论呗~

hychlavenderUID: 2697566

3# daidaren

谢谢，辛苦了~