Argument140 求拍 有拍必回~

SasakiKojiroUID: 2678315

140 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."


提纲：
1、
最大的班级不等于受学生的欢迎。
2、
过去两年不等于现在。
3、
即使他是优秀的教授，不一定是优秀的主任。
4、
没有证据表明她要去别的学校。
By Professor Thomas’s classes are the largest and she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years, the author draw a conclusion that she should be received a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, meanwhile, the author expresses a fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University without such raise and promotion. Convincing as the reasoning seems at the first glance, further reflection reveals that the conclusion is predicated on some dubious assumptions and biased evidences.

However, this is less evidence to approve Professor Thomas’ teaching and research abilities as the following two aspects. On the one hand, due to her the largest classes, the author has failed to take into account other factors demonstrating Professor Thomas’ popularity among students. It is possible that the majority of students tend to attend her class because her class may be a public course that those students in Elm City University are asked to accept. It is also likely that students in growing numbers exhibit so much interest in her class that they are willing to attend it. On the other hand, the author has failed to equate the condition over the last two years with the condition nowadays. As the author mentioned, Professor Thomas has brought much more money than her salary over the last two years. However, there is a highly possible that, because of her poor salary before, she could spare no efforts in her research to make her more income. It is also a possibility that, Professor Thomas may not bring to the university any profit any more in the following years, because, although during her seventeen years as a professor of botany, she only has brought such profits over the last two years.

Even if Thomas is a great professor of botany, it is now being questioned that whether she would be a good Department Chairperson. It is possible that, after Professor Thomas becomes a Department Chairperson, there would be much more other works such as whenever to take a examination for students, and have to connecting with those students’ parents, as a result, a great deal of time has been taken away, Professor Thomas may devote less time and energy in her research. Again, when Thomas becomes a Department Chairperson with huge income and much glory, it is highly possible for her not continuing to her research. In addition, the author shows no evidence about whether Professor Thomas would go for another college. Maybe Professor Thomas is in favor of this university and her students, regardless of her salary.

To reiterate, lacking more information and evidence on how to demonstrate Professor Thomas’ teaching and research abilities, this argument of the author is not convincing as it stands. Before any conclusions are made about whether Professor Thomas should be receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, and whether she would leave for another college, possible alternatives and causes should be considered by the author.