issue50~~这次字数好像少了点的说~~有拍必回

ella_dylUID: 2595060

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS:511      TIME: 00:45:00     DATE: 2010-3-20 上午 11:12:25

It is undeniable that the experience of some faculties in working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach may help provide more satisfactory educations for the practical demands from some students. However, it is not necessary to generalize this statement to include all the faculties as the author's assertion. Since the quality of instruction ought to be always on the priority, this recommendation should be based on a case-to-case analysis.

First and foremost, I concede that it is essential for faculty---especially those who teach practical courses---to spend extra time on professions outside academic world. In realms like management, not only academic knowledge but also actual experience is greatly valued to employers. Imagine if the teacher of management happens to be a manager of HR department from a large firm, he/she can present vivid practical cases and offer students almost exactly the employees'  requisition and their preference for graduates. Even if students are able to gain their own job experience, they can still obtain the latest information, ranging from the condition of job market to the skills to attract consumers. With such specific instruction, these students are more likely to perform better than others and to better adapt to the society. For fields like information technology, they are nearly changing in every minute. Therefore, most knowledge on textbooks is actually out-of-date. The extra time faculties spend on professions helps broaden their horizons. What they learned outside academic world can bring students more connected with the most advanced technology so that they will be less likely to be eliminated in the highly-competitive society. Considering the cases that most reactions of organic chemistry are comprehensively applied in pharmacy, even faculty who teaches fundamental science courses, if related to practical applications, is strongly recommended to spend some time on professions outside academic world.

Nevertheless, experiences of faculty in the theoretical courses working out are not requisite for the students' future career in the sense that the objective of these courses is to cultivate logical and critical thinking patterns or capability of abstract analysis or even merely imagination. Thus it is difficult for them to be combined with practice. A case in point is structural chemistry. Unlike organic chemistry, it is a discipline focused on the composition and configuration of a substance on molecular or atomic levels. Since technologies like "molecule design" are really not that popular, there is little sense for the faculty to work outside. Furthermore, it sometimes brings drawbacks. For instance, faculty majoring in literature, if work outside, would probably be influenced by temptations (power, wealth, beauty…) in the pragmatic world. Since inspiration and passion is vital for them, a pure environment and a highly-concentrated mind is indispensible.

From the analysis above, we can conclude that the necessity of the speaker's suggestion various from case to case. When assessing whether it is necessary for faculties to spend extra time outside academic world in professions relevant to courses they teach, we should always put students’ needs on the priority and consider the feasibility at the same time.

plukaUID: 2721764

It is undeniable that the experience of some faculties in working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach may help provide more satisfactory educations for the practical demands from some students. However, it is not necessary to generalize this statement to include all the faculties as the author's assertion. Since the quality of instruction ought to be always on the priority, this recommendation should be based on a case-to-case analysis.

First and foremost, I concede that it is essential for faculty---especially those who teach practical courses---to spend extra time on professions outside academic world. In realms like management, not only academic knowledge but also actual experience is greatly valued to employers. Imagine if the teacher of management happens to be a manager of HR department from a large firm, he/she can present vivid practical cases and offer students almost exactly the employees'（是employers吧）  requisition and their preference for graduates. Even if students are able to gain their own job experience, （“即使学生能自己获得经验，他们仍然能够获得最新情报……”这句话有让步转折的意思吗？内容上没有，但句式却用了，感觉很奇怪。如果说“学生自己很少有机会获得亲身经验，但他们仍然能够XXX”可能比较通顺）they can still obtain the latest information, ranging from the condition of job market to the skills to attract consumers. With such specific instruction, these students are more likely to perform better than others and to better adapt to the society. For fields like information technology, they are nearly changing in every minute. Therefore, most knowledge on textbooks is actually out-of-date. The extra time faculties spend on professions helps broaden their horizons. What they learned outside academic world can bring students more connected with the most advanced technology so that they will be less likely to be eliminated in the highly-competitive society. Considering the cases（用单数？） that most reactions of organic chemistry are comprehensively applied in pharmacy, even faculty who teaches fundamental science courses, if related to practical applications, is strongly recommended to spend some time on professions outside academic world（第一遍没看懂这个cases是啥意思，第二遍看懂了，但仍觉说得拐弯抹角了点。此为个人觉得这段举了管理学跟信息技术两个例子已经够了，有机化学什么的可要可不要，俺建议不要，把前面两个例子再补得丰满些。比如IT的可以加一些细节，是哪些书本知识落伍了，如果只学落伍的知识将来就业会如何（比如发现学过的用不上还需要学大量的新东西就业困难浪费时间和资源之类），有工作经验的老师能教什么云云。加强说服力用点细节效果不错。落后于时代啊被淘汰啊什么的当然也要讲，但此类总结性发言放在详述后面才会更有力度）. 

Nevertheless, experiences of faculty in the theoretical courses working out（这个修饰结构。。有点没看懂，working out是修饰啥的，理论课程么？感觉不对啊= =经验么？隔得太远了吧= =） are not requisite for the students' future career in the sense that the objective of these courses is to cultivate logical and critical thinking patterns or capability of abstract analysis or even merely imagination. Thus it is difficult for them to be combined with practice（这个thus不严谨。暂且承认前句说啥目标是XXX，包括even merely imagination（这个俺也觉得不太严谨），但这并不能说此目标就无法跟实践结合啊。培养想象力的，比如艺术，也有采风写生还有各种实用物品的设计咧。这个thus来的不太叫人信服。）. A case in point is structural chemistry. Unlike organic chemistry, it is a discipline focused on the composition and configuration（化学里面的结构不太用configuration，用structure就好） of a substance on molecular or atomic levels. Since technologies like "molecule design" are really not that popular, there is little sense for the faculty to work outside（错误因果。因为不受欢迎所以外出工作没用？不受欢迎也可以学到很多东西获得经验啊，为啥就断定没用了呢？不受欢迎只能推出不好就业难以就业之类）. Furthermore, it sometimes brings drawbacks. For instance, faculty majoring in literature, if work outside, would probably be influenced by temptations (power, wealth, beauty…) in the pragmatic world. Since inspiration and passion is vital for them, a pure environment and a highly-concentrated mind is indispensible（again，错误因果。灵感和激情并不一定只有纯洁的环境纯粹的头脑才能提供。不少艺术家外放又纵情，照样有激情有灵感。可以试着换个理由，被引诱可能让他们转而追逐名利而非艺术云云，但灵感激情这类东西私以为真不好准确定义。另，最后还是扯回到“教学”上来吧。）.（这段写缺陷写了两个方面，前一个是理论学科工作没用。问题是没有阐述清楚原因。为何没用？是找不到对口的工作，还是该工作与理论教学不沾边，还是别的什么？后一个是受引诱，可惜没有展开。两个点是OK的）

From the analysis above, we can conclude that the necessity of the speaker's suggestion various from case to case. When assessing whether it is necessary for faculties to spend extra time outside academic world in professions relevant to courses they teach, we should always put students’ needs on the priority and consider the feasibility at the same time.
开头和结尾都提到case to case study，但在正文部分“分事例分析”的印象真不深。如果要按具体事例分析，就不要选太多例子，找几个详述就好，就像那篇专才通才的五分范文。主要是要有细节有原因有结果有分析。而且，如果是按事例分析，最好针对每个事例做出点评和小结吧，显得比较完整。此篇正文部分分析得太概括，例子多但泛了些，案例分析得感觉没出来，倒更可能演变成平衡观点之类的写法，不过这种写法也不错啦只要处理得好。
字数问题么，论证加细节加分析，自然就上去了。
以上~加油。

JeevanUID: 2769884

500字还少啊？ -。-   考试时大概要写多少字合适？

ella_dylUID: 2595060

3# Jeevan
通常issue有550，argument有400比较理想，但是这个没什么规定
只是要把问题说清楚，肯定得有一定的字数保证
我指的字数少，其实你从LS大牛的修改也可以看出事实上是论证没有到位，说白了就是问题没说透

cooltozeroUID: 2705603

来学习过！！！其实五百字也就够了。