Issue50!!!求猛拍！！

linsophiaUID: 2472735

谢谢大家，必回拍！！

sunflower_irisUID: 2720580

One professor once emphasized the word "relevance" in the business academia, and the conception of sufficient interactions between academic world and industry is quite up-to-date. However, in certain field like research in cutting-edge technology and teaching in basic principles of general beliefs, part-time involvement outside the academic world would be preferred. Proper and effective instruction should vary according to the nature of different subjects.

Those subjects requiring strong interrelation with theory and reality should encourage a part of faculty, if not all, to participate relevant observations and research in industry. In a narrower perspective, those who have acquired Master or Phd degree in economics（这些人是否等同于faculty？他们与faculty spend time working outside又有什么关系？你可以说教授经济学或者类似学科的教授们在外工作会有以下的优点，但是这个主语即便带来有点也无法论证题目观点，对不对？）
should be provided more opportunities to work in banking industry to gain valuable experience. Then they will be back to college and university with a more balanced and practical views toward some principles once taught in textbooks. Also, their students will absorb new ideas and conceptions which is currently in practical use and might help establish their own system of attitude in dealing with tough issues facing us all, like the appropriate methods in front of economical crisis. Thus, subjects having a strong interactions with industries should be enhanced its frequence of involvement in order to instill fresh thoughts in industry for mutual benefits.（这个结论说的是一个外部与内部双赢的结果，但是这个结果对students又有什么意义呢？它的落脚点在教授与外界工业发展，但题目论点的落脚点在学生，在教授如何提高教学质量，是这样没错吧？那么，这个结论的得出就已经偏离了主题）

However, it would be useless or has less practical meaning for research and study that go far beyond or under the time of day to be progressed outside the academic world. For example, research in cutting-edge technology will not be put into practical use unless they are applicable. The knowledge and skills engaged in the research base on theories and experiences left by antecedent expertise in this field. Those alien theory and conclusion would become familiar if they come into practical use, but before that, the extra time spent outside the academia would in little use. Although, part-time involvement would help create new ideas,(这一句怎么得出来的？) fields in cutting-edge technology require much more time doing research in its specific academic world.

When it comes to general beliefs like principles of justice, freedom and citizenship that all shared by us all, faculty need more time working in the acdemic（academic） world. Although it might sound old-fashioned somehow, it can be compensated if faculty can introduce real cases from other fields and make a relevance(?什么意思？). The students can have a judgement about the real case that surrogate mother suddenly wants the baby after she had a contract with the baby's "parents", and then they will be provided the judge from supreme course, which might be contridict(contradict) or be consented by part of them. Those fields dealing with general principles should be put more efforts in the subjects themselves, thus making them more professional.

In sum, different subjects should be considered case by case so as to improve the quality of instruction in university and colleges. Business academic is encouraged to have strong interplay with industry to update its knowledge and make it more applicable in reality. But research in cutting-edge technology and teaching in general principles, part-time involvement is permissible while more time should be focused on subjects themselves. Nowadays, borders between academia and other worlds seem not so clear as those before, to create a win-win situation would be a mutual benefit.
先说优点，语言不错，逻辑上是通过学科分类来说是否需要working outside，这个是清楚的。
但是，要看到，working outside的是谁，faculty，是这样吧？目的是什么？improve the quality of instruction，没错吧？而你分析的学科能否找到相关工作或者工作到底有用没用都没有强调这两点，或者说没有最终落脚于能否improve the quality of instruction。你关注的key word 是relevant，但这恰恰不是最关键的word。你可以从这方面去说，就是faculty能否找到相关工作，或者这份工作有没有用，但是你要强调的不仅是对faculty的研究或者对学科的发展有利与否，更要强调的是对教学有用与否，对不对？这一点在B2中表现的最明显。B3的缺点在于分析不透彻，例子有的，但是例子与说理联系不紧密，这个例子如何说明faculty要在academic world更好呢？只说学生需要更多的principles，这和work outside又有何关系呢？段落中的逻辑关系不明确，就无法利用例子有效地支持你的观点。还有就是Although很多，适当的让步是考虑全面的表现，但要注意让步的目的是为了进一步证明你的观点而不是推翻，你的让步往往让人confuse你的观点到底是什么，这样，让步就失去了意义。
还是那句话，仔细分析题目中的论点和逻辑关系，找准key words，对你的行文大有裨益。加油：）