ISSUE50 （有拍必回~~）

NEU公孙轩辕UID: 2697609

观点：该方法有优点，但是不是一个周全的方法，存在问题,还有更多的方法来达到目的
提纲：  1 是否对所有学科都适用，从个人观点看，该结论不成立
          2 即便是参加了，是否就一定能提高教学质量? 不见得…….
          3 难道只有这一种方法可以提高教学质量? 反驳......

After analyzing the statement, I conceive it contains three meanings. First, the suggestion that spending time working outside the academic world in related professions can be applied to all faculties. Second, quality of instruction can be absolutely improved by carrying out the suggestion. Third, the suggestion seemingly serves as the only path to improve the quality of instruction. From my viewpoint, I can hardly agree with any one of them.

To begin with, I concede the experience faculties gained by working outside the academic world in related professions can definitely improve the quality of instruction regarding certain fields, such as economic, journalism, international relations, and so forth, which are usually related tightly with professions. Since students specialized in these fields need to get to the hot issues for the purpose of applying their knowledge into practice rather than merely learning those abstract theories. This will absolutely help students obtain a good command of the knowledge and develop their ability to apply them proficiently and flexibly, thus improving the quality of instruction.

However, we have got to realize that it’s impractical for the faculties of some fields to follow the suggestion, such as philosophy, pure theoretical mathematics, and so on. Clearly, these fields are characterized with the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking, which cannot be obtained through working outside the academic world in related professions. In my observation, to improve the quality of construction regarding these fields, colleges and universities might as well provide the faculties a free academic atmosphere. In conclusion, the suggestion cannot be simply applied to all the faculties regardless of the real demands of different fields for improvement.

Furthermore, can the quality of construction really improve even if the faculties of fields related with profession carry out the suggestion? From my viewpoint, I prefer to disagree with this. As we all know, working outside academic world in related professions may probably distract faculties from normal school teaching if they fail to regulate themselves properly. Consider a typical example. Judging from my daily experience, faculties nowadays usually join some research projects outside the campus, which is meant to be beneficial to both themselves and their students. Unfortunately, some faculties dedicate so much into the work that they cannot spare sufficient energy to the normal teaching, and this actually undermines the original purpose of this suggestion.

Meanwhile, we need to consider thoroughly whether the suggestion is the only path to improve the quality of construction. In my opinion, there actually exist many other methods can also promise to reach the same goal. Take examples to substantiate my viewpoint. First, the most effective path is to stimulate the students’ initiative to learn and explore, which will surly enhance the quality of instruction. Second, schools can advocate students to serve as volunteers in academic related companies to obtain necessary skills and experience by themselves, the effect of which will high likely far outweigh by learning through faculties. Clearly, the unsound suggestion is also not the only path to improve the quality of instruction.

To summarize, as has been discussed above, although the suggestion can be useful to some extent; however, it may not ensure the original purpose, and there actually exist many other more effective and sound methods to reach the goal.

nannan6474UID: 2612196

After analyzing the statement, I conceive it contains three meanings. First, the suggestion that spending time working outside the academic world in related professions can be applied to all faculties. Second, quality of instruction can be absolutely improved by carrying out the suggestion(这句话写得有点模糊，写the speaker’s suggestion 或许会好点). Third, the suggestion seemingly serves as the only path to improve the quality of instruction. From my viewpoint, I can hardly agree with any one of them.

To begin with, I concede the experience faculties gained by working outside the academic world in related professions can definitely（如果你是反对的观点，definitely这个词的语气就太强烈了，可以换成在一定程度上之类的词） improve the quality of instruction regarding certain fields, such as economic, journalism, international relations, and so forth, which are usually related tightly with professions. Since students specialized in these fields need to get to the hot issues for the purpose of applying their knowledge into practice rather than merely learning those abstract theories. This will absolutely help students obtain a good command of the knowledge and develop their ability to apply them proficiently and flexibly, thus improving the quality of instruction.

However, we have got to realize that it’s impractical for the faculties of some fields to follow the suggestion, such as philosophy, pure theoretical mathematics, and so on. Clearly, these fields are characterized with the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking, which cannot be obtained through working outside the academic world in related professions. In my observation, to improve the quality of construction regarding these fields, colleges and universities might as well provide the faculties a free academic atmosphere. In conclusion, the suggestion cannot be simply applied to all the faculties regardless of the real demands of different fields for improvement.

Furthermore, can the quality of construction really improve even if the faculties of fields related with profession carry out the suggestion? From my viewpoint, I prefer to disagree with this. As we all know（known）, working outside academic world in related professions may probably distract faculties from normal school teaching if they fail to regulate themselves properly. Consider a typical example. Judging from my daily experience, faculties nowadays usually join some research projects outside the campus, which is meant to be beneficial to both themselves and their students. Unfortunately, some faculties dedicate so much into the work that they cannot spare sufficient energy to the normal teaching, and this actually undermines the original purpose of this suggestion.

Meanwhile, we need to consider thoroughly whether the suggestion is the only path to improve the quality of construction. In my opinion, there actually exist many other methods can also promise to reach the same goal. Take examples to substantiate my viewpoint. First, the most effective path is to stimulate the students’ initiative to learn and explore, which will surly enhance the quality of instruction. Second, schools can advocate students to serve as volunteers in academic related companies to obtain necessary skills and experience by themselves, the effect of which will high likely far outweigh by learning through faculties. Clearly, the unsound suggestion is also not the only path to improve the quality of instruction.（既然是说老师出外工作的问题，从老师的角度出发可能会好一点，例如参加学术会议，上数据库看新的资料等等）

To summarize, as has been discussed above, although the suggestion can be useful to some extent; however, it may not ensure the original purpose, and there actually exist many other more effective and sound methods to reach the goal.

根据经验，ets的老头好像对五段比较有好感，既然是反对这个statement的话，第二段可以简写一点，你的第一段是反对的，第二段确实赞成的，考官又看得很快，这样容易给人立场不清晰地印象，再说考试写这么多时间可能会紧

可能我水平低，语法错误我找不出来，这是我的个人浅见，有问题可互相交流

plukaUID: 2721764

After analyzing the statement, I conceive it contains three meanings. First, the suggestion that spending time working outside the academic world in related professions can be applied to all faculties. Second, quality of instruction can be absolutely improved by carrying out the suggestion. Third, the suggestion seemingly serves as the only path to improve the quality of instruction. From my viewpoint, I can hardly agree with any one of them.

To begin with, I concede the experience faculties gained by working outside the academic world in related professions（此表达重复，是否可换） can definitely improve the quality of instruction regarding certain fields, such as economic, journalism, international relations, and so forth, which are usually related tightly with professions. Since students specialized in these fields need to get to the hot issues for the purpose of applying their knowledge into practice rather than merely learning those abstract theories. This will absolutely help students obtain a good command of the knowledge and develop their ability to apply them proficiently and flexibly, thus improving the quality of instruction. （说理很好，赞，可否添加例证？）

However, we have got to realize that it’s impractical for the faculties of some fields to follow the suggestion, such as philosophy, pure theoretical mathematics, and so on. Clearly, these fields are characterized with the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking, which cannot be obtained through working outside the academic world in related professions（再次出现，重复表达）. In my observation, to improve the quality of construction regarding these fields, colleges and universities might as well provide the faculties a free academic atmosphere. （单薄。解释为何自由的学术环境有益。解释他与the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking有啥联系之类。）In conclusion, the suggestion cannot be simply applied to all the faculties regardless of the real demands of different fields for improvement.（一样的问题，过于偏重说理，但发展不是很够，像argument。恐怕是不ISSUE该走的路。）

Furthermore, can the quality of construction （instruction）really improve even if the faculties of fields related with profession carry out the suggestion? From my viewpoint, I prefer to disagree with this. As we all know, working outside academic world in related professions may probably distract faculties from normal school teaching if they fail to regulate themselves properly. Consider a typical example. Judging from my daily experience, faculties nowadays usually join some research projects outside the campus, which is meant to be beneficial to both themselves and their students. Unfortunately, some faculties dedicate so much into the work that they cannot spare sufficient energy to the normal teaching, and this actually undermines the original purpose of this suggestion.（这段很好）

Meanwhile, we need to consider thoroughly whether the suggestion is the only path to improve the quality of construction. In my opinion, there actually exist many other methods （+that）can also promise to reach the same goal. Take examples to substantiate my viewpoint. First, the most effective path is to stimulate the students’ initiative to learn and explore, which will surly enhance the quality of instruction.（这个不是path，是原则。解释如何鼓励学生。事实上，要求教师工作的一个理由就是教师的工作经验能够鼓励和激励学生的学习） Second, schools can advocate students to serve as volunteers in academic related companies to obtain necessary skills and experience by themselves, the effect of which will high likely far outweigh by learning through faculties.（对于纯理论的学科比如哲学呢？） Clearly, the unsound suggestion is also not the only path to improve the quality of instruction.

To summarize, as has been discussed above, although the suggestion can be useful to some extent; however, it may not ensure the original purpose, and there actually exist many other more effective and sound methods to reach the goal.
对于问题解决型的题目，这样拆分是很清晰而聪明的。但本篇写得与argument十分相似，尤其偏重说理，一些地方发展和例证不够，比如有时列举了结论和建议但是不给原因和解释。总体看，思路相当清晰，表达简洁明了，很赞。

唔，意见提得可能不多（这篇已经很不错了），但也希望能得到回拍哈~
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1062019-1-1.html
谢谢~

gorbyUID: 2730851

1# NEU公孙轩辕
观点：该方法有优点，但是不是一个周全的方法，存在问题,还有更多的方法来达到目的
提纲：  1 是否对所有学科都适用，从个人观点看，该结论不成立
          2 即便是参加了，是否就一定能提高教学质量? 不见得…….
          3 难道只有这一种方法可以提高教学质量? 反驳......

After analyzing the statement, I conceive it contains three meanings. First, the suggestion that spending time working outside the academic world in related professions can be applied to all faculties. Second, quality of instruction can be absolutely improved by carrying out the suggestion. Third, the suggestion seemingly serves as the only path to improve the quality of instruction. From my viewpoint, I can hardly agree with any one of them.(呵呵，这种开头是你的风格，很理工科的风格啊)

To begin with, I concede the experience faculties gained by working outside the academic world in related professions can definitely improve the quality of instruction regarding certain fields, such as economic, journalism, international relations, and so forth, which are usually related tightly with professions. Since students specialized in these fields need to get to the hot issues for the purpose of applying their knowledge into practice rather than merely learning those abstract theories. This will absolutely help students obtain a good command of the knowledge and develop their ability to apply them proficiently and flexibly, thus improving the quality of instruction.

However, we have got to realize that it’s impractical for the faculties of some fields to follow the suggestion, such as philosophy, pure theoretical mathematics, and so on. Clearly, these fields are characterized with the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking, which cannot be obtained through working outside the academic world in related professions. In my observation, to improve the quality of construction regarding these fields, colleges and universities might as well provide the faculties a free academic atmosphere. In conclusion, the suggestion cannot be simply applied to all the faculties regardless of the real demands of different fields for improvement.（两个特点总结的很好，不过最好能再加点例子）

Furthermore, can the quality of construction really improve even if the faculties of fields related with profession carry out the suggestion? From my viewpoint, I prefer to disagree with this. As we all know, working outside academic world in related professions may probably distract faculties from normal school teaching if they fail to regulate themselves properly. Consider a typical example. Judging from my daily experience, faculties nowadays usually join some research projects outside the campus, which is meant to be beneficial to both themselves and their students. Unfortunately, some faculties dedicate so much into the work that they cannot spare sufficient energy to the normal teaching, and this actually undermines the original purpose of this suggestion.

Meanwhile, we need to consider thoroughly whether the suggestion is the only path to improve the quality of construction. In my opinion, there actually exist many other methods can also promise to reach the same goal. Take examples to substantiate my viewpoint. First, the most effective path is to stimulate the students’ initiative to learn and explore, which will surly enhance the quality of instruction. Second, schools can advocate students to serve as volunteers in academic related companies to obtain necessary skills and experience by themselves, the effect of which will high likely far outweigh by learning through faculties. Clearly, the unsound suggestion is also not the only path to improve the quality of instruction.

To summarize, as has been discussed above, although the suggestion can be useful to some extent; however, it may not ensure the original purpose, and there actually exist many other more effective and sound methods to reach the goal



这篇写的很不错，值得我学习啊！不过通篇看下来的确像楼上说的，有时候有点a的感觉，希望楼主注意下。

yanamourUID: 2767665

After analyzing the statement, I conceive it contains three meanings. First, the suggestion that spending time working outside the academic world in related professions can be applied to all faculties. Second, quality of instruction can be absolutely improved by carrying out the suggestion. Third, the suggestion seemingly serves as the only path to improve the quality of instruction. From my viewpoint, I can hardly agree with any one of them.

To begin with, I concede the experience faculties gained by working outside the academic world in related professions(可以换成areas) can definitely（somewhat） improve the quality of instruction regarding certain fields, such as economic, journalism, international relations, and so forth, which are usually related tightly with professions（practical circumstances）. Since students specialized in these fields need to get to the hot issues for the purpose of applying their knowledge into practice rather than merely learning those abstract theories. This will absolutely help students obtain a good command of the knowledge and develop their ability to apply them proficiently and flexibly, thus improving the quality of instruction.

However, we have got to realize that it’s impractical for the faculties of some fields to follow the suggestion, such as philosophy, pure theoretical mathematics, and so on. Clearly, these fields are characterized with the emphasis on thorough and deeply thinking, which cannot be obtained through working outside the academic world in related professions. In my observation, to improve the quality of construction regarding these fields, colleges and universities might as well provide the faculties a free academic atmosphere. In conclusion, the suggestion cannot be simply applied to all the faculties regardless of the real demands of different fields for improvement.这一段和上一段可以合起来 两端论证都很充分 不过前一段可以简写而第二段扩充一些例子如有了xx的环境后老师xx了于是教学水平xx了

Furthermore, can the quality of construction really improve even if the faculties of fields related with profession carry out the suggestion? From my viewpoint, I prefer to disagree with this. As we all know, working outside academic world in related professions may probably distract faculties from normal school teaching if they fail to regulate themselves properly. Consider a typical example. Judging from my daily experience, faculties nowadays usually join some research projects outside the campus, which is meant to be beneficial to both themselves and their students. Unfortunately, some faculties dedicate so much into the work that they cannot spare sufficient energy to the normal teaching, and this actually undermines the original purpose of this suggestion.(在后面再加个总结 所以the enhancement of education quality is not merely a function of whether teachers working outside academia.)

Meanwhile, we need to consider thoroughly whether the suggestion is the only path to improve the quality of construction. In my opinion, there actually exist many other methods can also promise to reach the same goal. Take examples to substantiate my viewpoint. First, the most effective path is to stimulate the students’ initiative to learn and explore, which will surly enhance the quality of instruction. Second, schools can advocate students to serve as volunteers in academic related companies to obtain necessary skills and experience by themselves, the effect of which will high likely far outweigh by learning through faculties. Clearly, the unsound suggestion is also not the only path to improve the quality of instruction.(这段在加入些具体例子比如xx因素如何影响，感觉lz的例子太抽象了 不如图书馆 实验室好写)

To summarize, as has been discussed above, although the suggestion can be useful to some extent; however, it may not ensure the original purpose, and there actually exist many other more effective and sound methods to reach the goal.(再基于三个方面一些建议)

回帖晚了些 不过也希望回拍
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... xtra=#pid1773635458
谢谢！