ARGU222-BY Pigwidgean最后七天，咬牙抓紧

PigwidgeanUID: 2759931

最后不到一星期了，限时还没有成功，有点着急了。。。
上网不是很方便，不过会做到每天上gter的，有拍必回，感激不尽！

danhomUID: 2687956

TOPIC: ARGUMENT222 - The following article appeared in a recent issue of a college newspaper.

"Among all students who graduated from Hooper University over the past five years, more physical science majors than social science majors found permanent jobs within a year of graduation. In a survey of recent Hooper University graduates, most physical science majors said they believed that the prestige of Hooper University's physical science programs helped them significantly in finding a job. In contrast, social science majors who found permanent employment attributed their success to their own personal initiative. Therefore, to ensure that social science majors find permanent jobs, Hooper University should offer additional social science courses and hire several new faculty members who already have national reputations in the social sciences."
WORDS: 370
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2010-3-12 上午 11:40:30

At first glance, the author's recommendation that Hooper University should offer additional social courses as well as hiring new faculty members with national reputation in the social sciences seems reasonable.（我觉得在开头能把作者的逻辑关系点出来比较好，不仅仅单纯写一下作者的结论。看板上那些大牛改作文，都建议把作者给出的evidence间的逻辑关系提一下，再写出作者的结论，lz可以借鉴下~时间来不及的话，可以先把body段的TP先打好，打完了再来写开头段的evidence间的逻辑顺序错误就快一点~）

However, the author fails to convince us by making a false analogy mistake. Even though the main reason why physical science majors are easier to get permanent jobs is indeed just the existence of the prestige of Hooper University's physical science programs, we can not assert that things will be the same for social science majors. Common sense tells us that physical science and social science are quite different in most cases（哪些cases？这个才是重点呢！）. For the former, the prestige may affect the students' job seeking a lot, while at the same time, jobs of social sciences may consider more about the employee's personal initiative.
另，这五年的市场需求也有一定的影响。

What's more, as we all know that in most cases, scientists working on natural sciences, especially physical science, are more likely to prefer a permanent job which can provides them with a relatively steady and quiet environment. While social scientists, considering the properties of their work, may probably choose to change their work from time to time, if the situation urge him to.（作者错在哪里了呢？）

Some questions about the survey the author fails to answer may undermine his statement severely. For example, how many graduates are interviewed in the survey and what about the ratio of each major? If 100 students were surveyed in which 10 major in physical science, the results would be highly suspect. In addition, are the samples able to represent all the graduates? From the survey quoted in this argument, we find no sign of such procedures for random samplings, and have good reasons to doubt the validity of the survey.

Last but not least, the author fails to provide the evidence that the university now is in lack of such social courses as well as such faculty members with national reputations in social sciences, which makes his advice quite suspectable.

To include（conclude）, the argument, though seems advisable, has several flaws as I have discussed above. It could be improved by providing further scientific study of the reason why indeed social science majors are fewer to get permanent jobs, more than comparing with physical science majors.

个人觉得在body段论证的时候能按照“TP+一句过渡句+一到两个例子+段落小总结（类似于TP的句子）”这样的一个论证结构，这样文章显得比较有条理，而且比较容易套套模板啥的。
可以借鉴一下北美范文，看大约20篇比较典型的吧，总结下每篇文章里的TP、过渡、举例和段落总结的句式，其实看多了都是一个套路啦；再来寄托上看看别的大牛的句式，练练打字速度，7天里还是可以有很多进步的呢。
多看看范文，多总结一下，一起加油哦~