ISSUE50 -byemteddybear 求拍

emteddybearUID: 2699606

新修改的见第八楼


写得时候发现一个问题，就是我不知道那个faculty应该用单数的比较好还是复数的比较好，然后就用得很混乱，其实我觉得用单数比较好的，但是每次用单数的时候，当出现他的时候都要用个he or she 我觉得很别扭，然后就憋着把他改成复数，╮(╯▽╰)╭，很是郁闷，请大家给我明示，这种问题到底怎么处理一下比较好一点

Issue50 “In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach”
反对题目观点（发现80%的人都是折中的观点）
提纲：1.很多科目都没有实际经验可言的，例如艺术，文学等
2.即使有些科目确实比较需要实际经验，但是我认为现在的大学教授们所具备的知识以及完全足够教授学生了，因为学生来学校学习还是要把基本知识体系学懂，学透，一味的只追求实践，不着眼与理论，那和那些技术工有什么区别，我们需要的是高素质的创新人才，而所有的创新都是建立在扎实的基础之上的，没有理论怎么创新。事实证明学生毕业之后走向社会对其考验更多的是思维，而并非单纯的实际操作。
3.一味的鼓励老师出去会导致不良的风气，破坏学校良好的氛围，有可能导致教师因沉迷于赚钱，而轻视了对学生的教育，这将势必给教育带来恶果。


As the rapid-pace development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, and this phenomenon is also reflected in higher education, which provides talents for community. Many people, or even many educators, think that all faculties should go out of schools to work for some experience in practical to improve the quality of education. And they might think it can make students more easily and quickly to adapt the needs of our society by this way. But I am afraid that I can't agree with such kind of issue.

In the first place, not all the disciplines have the concept of practice to speak, such as history, art, pure mathematics. There are only theories or abstract concepts in such subjects. For example, pure mathematics, which is different from applied mathematics, is the science of numbers and their operations, interrelations, combinations, generalizations, and abstractions and of space configurations and their structure, measurement, transformations, and generalizations. All of above are imagined or proposed by our mathematicians, and divorced from reality. It is usually divorced from reality and so abstract that students always confused. Only when faculties in mathematics make their study intensively, they can teach their students clearly and let their students understand what they are talking about, and it is the greatest success in instructing this kind of subject. So the most urgent task of the faculty in mathematics is getting down to do some research without any disturbance, but not to go out for a work.

Meanwhile, even for faculty in those subjects which have relation to experience in practical, there is no need for them to work outside, and it will not evolve the education but obstruct it. For one thing, the experience in practical of faculty is always enough to add into classes when they are discussing theories, because usually faculty can accumulate experience in practical by doing some scientific research project funding by the nation. For another, experience in practical is only the subordinate in instruction, and the main part is the rudiments, although there is no doubt that if a teacher add some experience in practical, it will make his or her class more vivid and interesting. Imagining that if what faculties teach is mainly about the experience in practical but only with a few of theory, what students can learn is only superficial knowledge. If a student, who will work for a company after he or she graduates, lacks of basic knowledge framework, how can he or she make some innovation which is required by the company. And what can this kind of students do is only some simple and repetitive work, which is worthless.

What's more, blindly encouraging teachers to go out will cause bad effects. It is possible that teachers are enthralled to earn more money but forget the original purpose of working outside. At the same time, both energy and time of faculties are problems. If faculties go out for a work, they will pay less attention for instruction, which must impact the quality of education but not improve. And they may cut his classes because an individual could not use two of him or her. Under such circumstances, how could teachers teach their students well, how could improve the quality of instruction? For instance, in our university, there is an institute, which pays too much attention to practice, and encourages faculties to go out for a work, and where there is a teacher who is busy for his own profits by founding his own company. He almost spends more than half of his time to deal with things of his company, and only ask senior classes to direct the junior classes. We are all worried about the future of his students, because they can't learn anything from his teacher. What a tragedy!

All in all, no matter what discipline the faculty belongs to, they should not got out for a work, and it is more a loss than gain.

risyomeiUID: 2679353

正好在写这道题的提纲，我发现你的观点很棒。
不过我觉得，是不是观点不够偏正啊，会不会用一个支持的观点再加两个反对的观点会更好呢？
我纯属菜鸟，你觉得有道理就听没道理就当我没说吧~

jinziqiUID: 2387034

faculty 是集体名词 没有复数

emteddybearUID: 2699606

哦
谢谢哈
那要用到第三人称的时候 是不是该说“他们”呢
3# jinziqi

emteddybearUID: 2699606

其实我也是菜鸟啊
不过通常都是你那样写的哈
我这次也是做一次尝试而已
呵呵 没有对错
按照你自己想的去做就好了
只要你言之有理
这也是我的感觉哦
2# risyomei

jinziqiUID: 2387034

4# emteddybear
嗯 应该是吧

jinziqiUID: 2387034

As the rapid-pace (貌似不用连字符) development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, and this phenomenon is also reflected in higher education, which provides talents for community. Many people, or even many educators, think that all faculties (faculty) should go out of schools to work for some experience in practical to improve the quality of education. And they might think it can make students more easily and quickly to adapt the needs of our society by this way (可省). But I am afraid that I can't agree with such kind of issue (这样一个问题，觉得如果是改成”我不能同意这样一个建议或者提议”更搭配一些).

In the first place, not all the disciplines have the concept of practice to speak (没明白~不是所有的纪律都有可以去说的练习的概念? 或者你的意思是不是所有的学科都有实践的概念可以说…我才知道discipline有学科的意思呵呵, 句式可以改下~), such as history, art, and pure mathematics. There are only theories or abstract concepts in such subjects. For example, pure mathematics, which is different from applied mathematics, is the science of numbers and (看了半天终于明白了，science of numbers and their operations是一起的吧…) their operations, interrelations, combinations, generalizations, and (似乎多了一个and) abstractions and of space configurations and their structure, measurement, transformations, and generalizations. (个人建议
Mathematics is the science of numbers and their operations, interrelations, combinations, generalizations, abstractions, and of space configurations and their structure.干脆后面不要了…已经够多的了) All of above are imagined or proposed by our mathematicians, and divorced (separated) from reality. It is usually divorced (这是离婚吧) from reality and so abstract that students are always confused. Only when faculties in mathematics make their study intensively, they can teach their students clearly and let their students understand what they are talking about, and it is the greatest success in instructing this kind of subject. So the most urgent task of the faculty in mathematics is getting down to do some research without any disturbance, but not to go out for a work (but作何解? 前面没有not不知道还是不是”而是”的意思).
逻辑比我好多了.例子也很能证明自己的观点。


Meanwhile, even for faculty in those subjects which have relation to (with) experience in practical, there is no need for them to work outside, and it will not evolve the education but obstruct it. For one thing, the experience in practical of faculty is always enough to add (be added因为主语是the experience所以用被动) into classes when they are discussing theories, because usually faculty can accumulate experience in practical by doing some scientific research project funding by the nation. (我不知道他们做research的经历够不够practical~) For another, experience in practical is only the subordinate in instruction, and the main part is the rudiments, although there is no doubt that if a teacher add(s) some experience in practical, it will make his or her class more vivid and interesting. Imagining that if what faculties teach is mainly about the experience in practical but only with a few of theory, what students can learn is only superficial knowledge. If a student, who will work for a company after he or she graduates, lacks of basic knowledge framework, how can he or she make some innovation which is required by the company. And what can this kind of students do (what this kinds of students can do) is only some simple and repetitive work, which is worthless. (就算老师出去获得experience in practical怎么能说他们在课堂上就讲这些更多而知识变少了呢? )


What's more, blindly encouraging teachers to go out will cause bad effects. It is possible that (不确定issue里是否应该用这样的语气，感觉issue的分析都应该是十分肯定的，这样才能更好的证明自己的观点。) teachers are enthralled to earn more money but forget the original purpose of working outside. At the same time, both energy and time of faculties are problems. If faculties go out for a work (job), they will pay less attention for instruction, which must impact the quality of education but not improve (还是but). And they may cut his classes because an individual could not use two of him or her (个人感觉有点Chinglish~). Under such circumstances, how could teachers teach their students well, and how could they improve the quality of instruction? For instance, in our university, there is an institute, which pays too much attention to (on) practice, and encourages faculties to go out for a work, and where there is a teacher who is busy for his own profits by founding his own company. He almost spends more than half of his time to deal with things of his company, and only ask(s) senior classes to direct the junior classes. We are all worried about the future of his students, because they can't learn anything from his teacher. What a tragedy!

All in all, no matter what discipline the faculty belongs to, they should not got (get) out for a work, and it is more a loss than gain.

你写了好多字啊O(∩_∩)O~感觉逻辑很好，例子基本能证明观点，比我的好多了~语言多写写肯定就更好了~

emteddybearUID: 2699606

感谢jinziqi和大海提出的宝贵意见，确实是一针见血啊，感动ing，于是好好消化之后再次修改，请大家继续拍，谢谢
As the rapid pace development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, and this phenomenon is also reflected in higher education, which provides talents for community. Many people, or even many educators, think that all faculty should go out of schools to work for some experience in practical to improve the quality of education. But I am afraid that I can't agree with such kind of recommendation.

In the first place, not all the disciplines have the concept of practice, such as history, art, or
pure mathematics. There are only theories or abstract concepts in such subjects. For example, pure mathematics, which is mathematics motivated entirely for reasons other than application, is the science of operations, generalizations, and abstractions of numbers and structure, measurement, and generalizations of space configurations. All of above are imagined, speculated or proposed by our mathematicians, and divorced from reality. It is so abstract that students always confused. Only when faculty in mathematics make their study intensively, can they teach their students clearly and let their students understand what they are talking about, which is the greatest success in instructing this kind of subject. So the most urgent task of the faculty in mathematics is getting down to do some research without any disturbance, but not to go out for a work.

Meanwhile, even for faculty in those subjects which have relation to experience in practical, there is no need for them to work outside, and it will not evolve the education but obstruct it. For one thing, the experience in practical of faculty is always enough to be added into classes when they are discussing theories, because faculty can accumulate sufficient experience in practical by doing some scientific research project funding by the nation. For another, experience in practical is only the subordinate in instruction, and the main part is the rudiments. There is no doubt that adding some experience in practical will make faculty’s classes more vivid and interesting, but too much experience in practical to be added will make insufficient time for theory, and that what students can learn is only superficial knowledge, because course duration is limited. When students, lacking of basic knowledge, work for companies after graduation, they can’t facilitate innovation which is required by the company, since the inspiring of innovation is always based on some special backgrounds. And what
those students can do is merely some simple and repetitive work which is worthless.

What's more, blindly encouraging teachers to go out will cause bad effects. Based on the rapid pace development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, while to some extent, the atmosphere of school is much purer. If faculty are allowed to work outside, they will be easily enthralled to earn more money but forget the original purpose of working outside. At the same time, both energy and time of faculty are problems. If a teacher goes out for a work, he/she will pay less attention for instruction, which must impact the quality of teaching, rather than improve. He must cut course duration because an individual could not use two of him. Under such circumstances, how could faculty teach their students well, how could faculty improve the quality of instruction? For instance, last year in our university, the headmaster made a policy that faculty are allowed to go out for a part-time job, but just this mouth, he received a letter of accusation. In this letter, a teacher was indicted spending too less time on guiding his students. By a inquiry, this teacher has found his own company, who almost costs more than half of his time to deal with things of his company, but only asks senior students to direct the junior, which make his students can't learn anything from him. What a tragedy!


All in all, no matter what discipline the faculty belongs to, they should not get out for a work, and it is more a loss than gain.

doudou4208UID: 2755549

唉，我的rp啊，我都发了半个多小时了也没人理我。。。。嘿嘿~~~我也帮你看看，但我现在处于看不懂别人英文的状态，晕死了。。。

rodgoodUID: 2619326

大概修改了下下 望批判性接受 呵呵


As the rapid pace development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, and this phenomenon is also reflected in higher education, which provides talents for community. Many people, or even many educators, think that all faculty should go out of schools to work for some experience in practical to improve the quality of education. But I am afraid that(×) I can't agree with such kind of recommendation.
In the first place, not all the disciplines have the concept of practice (没有实践的概念？什么意思), such as history, art, or pure mathematics. There are only theories or abstract concepts（哦，前面是不是中式英语了。） in such subjects. For example, pure mathematics, which is mathematics motivated entirely for reasons other than application, is the science of operations, generalizations, and abstractions of numbers and structure, measurement, and generalizations of
space configurations. All of above are imagined, speculated or proposed by our mathematicians, and divorced from reality. It is so abstract that students are always confused. Only when faculty in mathematics make their study intensively,
can they teach their students clearly and let their students (them) understand what they are talking about(意思不就是前面的clearly嘛), which is the greatest success in instructing this kind of subject. So the most urgent task of the faculty in mathematics（最后应该归结到这些学科上，而非数学上，数学只是个例子） is getting down to do some research without any disturbance, but not to go out for a work.
Meanwhile, even for faculty in those（the） subjects which have relation(related) to experience in practical(practice), there is no need for them to work outside, and it will not evolve the education but obstruct it. For one thing, the experience in practical of faculty is always enough to be added into classes when they are discussing theories, because faculty can accumulate sufficient experience in practical by doing some scientific research project funding by the nation. For another, experience in practical is only the subordinate in instruction, and the main part is the rudiments. There is no doubt that adding some experience in practical will make faculty’s classes more vivid and interesting, but too much experience in practical to be added will make insufficient time for theory, and that(这个that从哪冒出来的) what students can learn is only superficial knowledge, because course duration is limited. When students, lacking of basic knowledge, work for companies after graduation, they can’t facilitate innovation which is required by the company, since the inspiring of innovation is always based on some special backgrounds. And what
those students can do is merely some simple and repetitive work which is worthless.
What's more, blindly encouraging teachers to go out will cause bad effects. Based on the rapid pace development of society, people are more and more eager for quick success and instant benefit, while to some extent, the atmosphere of school is much purer. If faculty are allowed to work outside, they will be easily enthralled to earn more money but forget the original purpose of working outside. At the same time, both energy and time of faculty are problems. If a teacher goes out for a work, he/she will pay less attention for instruction, which must（太绝对了） impact the quality of teaching, rather than improve. He must（need to） cut course duration because an individual could not use two of him. Under such circumstances, how could faculty teach their students well, how could faculty improve the quality of instruction? For instance, last year in our university, the headmaster made a policy that faculty are allowed to go out for a part-time job, but just this mouth, he received a letter of accusation. In this letter, a teacher was indicted spending too less time on guiding his students. By a inquiry, this teacher has found his own company, who almost costs more than half of his time to deal with things of his company, but only asks senior students to direct the junior, which make his students can't learn anything from him. What a tragedy!(…= =!)


All in all, no matter what discipline the faculty belongs to, they should not get out for a work, and it is more a loss than gain.