【1010G精英组】ISSUR&ARGU 习作——by Group Choice

xingfuhbjUID: 2769976

第四次作业  ARUMENT 45



用时：由于被BS打断~，思维断了一下。总共写了差不多1个至1个半小时



作者观点：

1． 猎人报告鹿的数量减少

2． 近期报告说明全球变暖导致冰层融化。

1+2→二者同时发生，说明是由于鹿的迁徙通道被切断而导致鹿无法觅食，数量减少。

反对观点：

1．猎人的报告并不能说明鹿真的减少了。可能是鹿北迁移离开了猎人居住的地方。

2．题目所给信息未表明，全球变暖导致鹿群迁徙通道中断。At least

3．即使二者成立了，也可能是别的原因导致鹿的数量减少。比如说偷猎者，食物减少。

1+2+3→作者观点不成立

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Grounding on the report which claiming the decline of the Arctic deer, and synthesizing with the Simultaneous fact that the recent global warming trends have caused the sea ice to melt, the arguer deduced that decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.

However, what the hunters’ report can’t be taken for the compelling evidence to prove that the arctic deer do in decline. There is a possibility that those arctic deer may move north due to the warming climate. At this circumstance, the local hunters will definitely find that the deer population was declining. Even those arctic deer never migrant at all, how much can we rely on the figure that those hunters reported? The reason why a figure in a science report is creditable lies in those scientific, substantiated, authentic statistical methods behind it. Then what statistical method did the local hunters used to count the number of arctic deer? Maybe they do the calculating work through sampling survey, but the big error caused by the undirectional motion of those deer may fill up the declined number. What’s more, those hunters can’t trace those deer like zoologist usually does. They can only count the deer they met, which just lessen the reliability of the report.

Granting that the deer population do decreased, the argument above can’t give any convincing proof to testifying the causal relation between the global warming and the discontinuance of the passage for deer migration. The text above indicating that the temperature of deer’s habitat should be cold enough for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. But it just required for a period time of the year to meet the request. Though the situation of global warming does allow for no optimist, but does it warm enough to halt the icing process of the seawater that cutting the deer’s foraging way for the whole year? We can’t exclude the odds that the ices melted now just near the Arctic region, which means no influence on the ice in arctic region at all. And even some ices within arctic region began to melt, we still not reason enough to deduce that the ices within Canada’s arctic region are melting now. Nor can we conduct that the seawater around deer’s habitat do can’t be frozen anymore.

To say the least, even the two hypotheses was true, the combination of those two factor still not compelling enough to support the assertion. Poaching may contribute to the decline of deer population. And the changing climate may lead to the decrease of the plants on which deer feed, what should be responsible for the declining deer too.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. The arguer should collect more references and do more research to exclude any other possible reason for the decrease in arctic deer populations. all scientific conclusion should based on the sound logic.

xingfuhbjUID: 2769976

第四次作业  ARUMENT 45

用时：由于被BS打断~，思维断了一下。总共写了差不多1个至1个半小时

作者观点：
1．
猎人报告鹿的数量减少
2．
近期报告说明全球变暖导致冰层融化。
1+2→二者同时发生，说明是由于鹿的迁徙通道被切断而导致鹿无法觅食，数量减少。
反对观点：
1．猎人的报告并不能说明鹿真的减少了。可能是鹿北迁移离开了猎人居住的地方。
2．题目所给信息未表明，全球变暖导致鹿群迁徙通道中断。At least
3．即使二者成立了，也可能是别的原因导致鹿的数量减少。比如说偷猎者，食物减少。
1+2+3→作者观点不成立
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grounding on the report which claiming the decline of the Arctic deer, and synthesizing with the Simultaneous fact that the recent global warming trends have caused the sea ice to melt, the arguer deduced that decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
However, what the hunters’ report can’t be taken for the compelling evidence to prove that the arctic deer do in decline. There is a possibility that those arctic deer may move north due to the warming climate. At this circumstance, the local hunters will definitely find that the deer population was declining. Even those arctic deer never migrant at all, how much can we rely on the figure that those hunters reported? The reason why a figure in a science report is creditable lies in those scientific, substantiated, authentic statistical methods behind it. Then what statistical method did the local hunters used to count the number of arctic deer? Maybe they do the calculating work through sampling survey, but the big error caused by the undirectional motion of those deer may fill up the declined number. What’s more, those hunters can’t trace those deer like zoologist usually does. They can only count the deer they met, which just lessen the reliability of the report.
Granting that the deer population do decreased, the argument above can’t give any convincing proof to testifying the causal relation between the global warming and the discontinuance of the passage for deer migration. The text above indicating that the temperature of deer’s habitat should be cold enough for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. But it just required for a period time of the year to meet the request. Though the situation of global warming does allow for no optimist, but does it warm enough to halt the icing process of the seawater that cutting the deer’s foraging way for the whole year? We can’t exclude the odds that the ices melted now just near the Arctic region, which means no influence on the ice in arctic region at all. And even some ices within arctic region began to melt, we still not reason enough to deduce that the ices within Canada’s arctic region are melting now. Nor can we conduct that the seawater around deer’s habitat do can’t be frozen anymore.
To say the least, even the two hypotheses was true, the combination of those two factor still not compelling enough to support the assertion. Poaching may contribute to the decline of deer population. And the changing climate may lead to the decrease of the plants on which deer feed, what should be responsible for the declining deer too.
In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. The arguer should collect more references and do more research to exclude any other possible reason for the decrease in arctic deer populations. all scientific conclusion should based on the sound logic.

elevenkarUID: 2791267

45.The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for
food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year.
Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on
which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice
to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over
it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer
populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global
warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that
the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable
to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."

逻辑分析：
原题中论据：
1北极鹿生活在加拿大极地区域的岛屿上。它们全年都通过冰块在岛屿间移动来寻找食物。它们的栖居地局限在那些温暖得足以维持它们所需的植物生长，并且在一年的至少某些时候冷到足以让岛屿间的海面结冰以使它们能够在岛屿间旅行的地方
2根据当地猎人的报告，鹿的数量正在下降
3这一报告正好与最近导致海洋冰面融化的全球变暖趋势同时发生
结论：
北极鹿数量的下降是它们无法按它们原有的迁移习惯穿越结冰海面的结果。
既作者的推理过程
鹿生存需要冰块+猎人报告鹿的数量减少+正好全球变暖——>鹿减少由于生存所需冰块没了——>鹿减少由于原有迁移习惯的被破坏
错误存在：
1 第一个论据中的描述互相存在悖论。既然全年都通过冰块间的移动而寻找食物，那么栖息地与欧温暖的足以维持他们生长所需的植物又有什么用呢？（虽然有想到，但是觉得不好写，就抛弃了这个）
2 猎人报告可信度质疑
3 全球变暖与鹿的下降同时发生不能推出互相之间的因果存在关系由于：
（1）
全球变暖不一定会影响到鹿的生存地的冰块融化
（2）
就算影响到了生存区冰块，那鹿的数量变少也不一定是迁移习惯受影响的原因也有可能因为他们被其他的动物给吃了等等


正文如下：
In the argument, the author concludes that the decline in arctic deer populations results from their failure to follow traditional migration patterns to cross the frozen sea. To uphold the conclusion, the author cites reports from local hunters and points out that the reports coincide with the recent global warming trends. At first glance, the argument appears to be somehow plausible, however close scrutiny reveals that it is flawed in several critical aspects.

In the first place, the argument is based on a questionable report from local hunters. Local hunters are people who have vested interests in hunting preys as many as possible, so it is possible they have killed large amount of deer and lie about it. Even assuming that hunters are honest, the report is still unlikely to reveal the truth. The seemingly decline in the number arctic deer observed by hunters might not objectively reflect the real population of deer. For example, it is entirely possible that hunters are living in a limited area and fail to have chances to observe the whole population. Or perhaps deer have migrated to other areas when the ice can cover the sea, thus giving the hunters an illusion that the deer population are decreasing. Therefore, lacking the pertinent information, the report cited is highly suspected.

Secondly, even if I were to concede that the report is convincing, the author overlooks the possibility that the global warming trends might have no effects on the specific region mentioned in the argument. Common knowledge informs me that some places have very thick ice layer and not all sea ice areas are affected by the global warming. Perhaps arctic deer are living on the places covered by vast ice sheets reaching a thickness of several kilometers that are unlikely to be melting in a short time.

Thirdly, granted that the specific region mentioned in the argument is also affected by the global warming trends, the author commits a fallacy of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc" in assuming that the decline in arctic deer populations is attributable to the melting sea ice due to the recent global warming trends. However, it is not necessarily the case. Many other possible factors can explain the phenomenon. For example, perhaps they are killed by hunters who want to obtain their horns and furs. Or perhaps they fall prey to other large carnivores, such as arctic bears and wolves. It is also entirely possible that arctic deer cannot adapt to the changing environmental conditions brought about by natural processes. Without ruling out or even considering the alternative explanations, it would be groundless to simply attribute the decline in arctic deer populations to the global warming trends.

In sum, the argument rests on several ambiguous assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author must provide firm evidence that the reports are reliable and failure to follow traditional migration is the only reason results in the decline of deer populations. To better evaluate the argument, the author should lend more information about the circumstances of ice layers on the specific region mentioned in the argument.

toywangUID: 2700880

1 arctic deer 通过moving over ice 来觅食
2 为什么他们生活的岛屿要warm enough to sustain the plant they feed?
3 local hunter, 这个职业给予的所谓的populations的降低时可疑的。
4 报告的来源
in the reports already admit that it was coin side, so we recognize the relation between the two sides, but we cannot ignore the other factors.

In this argument, the writer of this article concludes that global warming caused a decline in the number of deer which live in Canada’s arctic region. To support his or her conclusion, the writer cites a report from a local hunter and reveals a fact that these deer search for food by moving over ice to island. However, after a strict analysis, there are several doubts come into my mind.

First of all, the argument is based on only one reports from one local hunters’ reports. When one accepts the conclusion, he or she cannot ignore the reporters’ status. It is not necessary for a group of hunters to analysis why the population of arctic deer is decline. They must find this phenomenon from their daily life, and they blame this to global warming. As the hunters themselves say in the reports that it was just coin side which means that they cannot provide any reliable and believable data to show the relationship between deer’s population and global warming. For example, it is entirely possible that local hunters killed a quantity of arctic deer and other deer migrate to other region which has less hunters.

Secondly, there is a paradox in this argument. The writer says that arctic deer need to feed themselves by moving over ice during the course of the year,
however what comes next is that their habitat is warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed. There is no need for them to moving over ice for that they have enough food to sustain, and the global warming will do not influence them at all. So there must be many other reasons which cause the declination of deer’s population.
Finally, even we assume that these deer need to survival through different kinds of food which they cannot get from their habitat only, the conclusion that the decline of arctic deer cannot only blame to global warming. The reason they moving over ice are to find food, however, the way they find food is not only limited to this. If we take this into consideration, the real problem cause the declination is the lack of some specific sort of food instead of global warming.

In summary, the writer fails to establish any causal relationship between deer’s population and weather change, so it was obviously that the final account can only be coincidence instead of persuaded. The evidence presented is extremely weak at best and narrowly focuses on a group of hunters in one region, as well as their partial reports. For a stronger argument, the writer would need to directly conduct a survey by scientists which would consider not only weather problems but also diversity issues in this region in Canada.

xingfuhbjUID: 2769976

修改 weili 第四次作业 ARUMENT 45   by xingfuhbj("TEAR。.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1、讲了下北极鹿的习性
2、当地猎户报告，鹿少了
3、这和气候变暖巧合，气候变暖使得冰融化，
4、我们得出结论：北极鹿的减少是由于他们找不到穿越冰冻海洋的路线了

a、猎户说少不见得鹿就少，只是他们家附近鹿少了。
b、鹿少不见得就是找不到前人迁徙的路了。
C、没人证明鹿的路没了
The argument get a conclusion that the decline of arctic deer populations is because of(这种表原因的表达很不native,尤其是放在句中使用) deer’s losing their age-old migration patterns’ way to cross the frozen sea. At first, the editorial introduces the habits of arctic deer, which will travel over the ice in cold days. But recent global warming trends to cause the sea ice to melt, so the author thinks it may make deer unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. And local hunters found the deer populations were declining. So the writer said(建议用deduced替代) that’s for the disappearing of ice ways, (去掉”,”)which connected many islands. However, the logic is unreasonable and problematic in some respects.
第一段就占了全文的1/3，建议作者用简略的文字来复述题意.
给两个链接你瞅瞅：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=134092&highlight=
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=920961&highlight
Firstly, the report from local hunters that the deer populations are declining doesn’t mean the whole arctic deer populations are truly cutting down. It can only certify that the deer living near local hunters is becoming less. Maybe many of them, for the global warming, immigrate to a place northerner(建议作者不要自己造词…这个词的意思是”北方人”~ 用 more north就欧了~) than local hunters’ houses, but the whole populations of them are likely to still(感觉加个still有点小不和谐不native~ 不过这个可以忽略喏~) growing.
Even we assume that the place hunters living all over Canada and the quantity of deer is exactly down, the conclusion is still questionable. Because there are many other reasons can result in the decline of deer populations, nevertheless the author didn’t rule out other causes away.(感觉这句话是把一个意思讲了两遍.我懂作者的意思,不过建议把它合成为一句话) For instance, the global warming is possible to get the death of many plants, which are article deer’s food. At last(用表示因果关系的as a result”等词来连接会更好,表明你的sound logic.), the number of deer is cutting down for lack of food.
Finally, there is no proof of the disappearing of ice way connecting islands. Maybe global warming just causes the ice way’s generating later than before, but deer can still follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. It’s not the real reason which makes deer’s population down.
In sum, if there are more detail report about the quantity of arctic deer, more analysis of the declining of deer, the conclusion will be more appropriate. The influence of global warm should also be known well enough to find whether it makes deer unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. If the author could rule out other cause away, it would be more logical. Anyway, I don’t agree with the conclusion.
我发现作者的开头和结尾都比较长~ 貌似都占了全文的1/2了,说理部分反而显得很薄弱,何况文章的篇幅本来也不算长,这样一来说理部分就感觉更~
我了解作者对作文的要求不是很高~但是我仍然建议作者多注意语言的问题，尽量把字数写到400以上.我想说的时是现在对自己要求都不高的话,或许真正上了考场后,连自己所期望的底线都很有可能达不到的~.版版不是也希望我们以高标准要求自己么。
作者的GPA这么优秀,现在时间也充裕,写作时对语言上上心应该也不是很难的事儿啊~ 我也是希望作者可以考个很好的成绩才说这么多滴~希望不会嫌我啰嗦啦!加油落！

lxklysUID: 2738043

45.The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for
food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year.
Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on
which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice
to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over
it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer
populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global
warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that
the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable
to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."
结论：改变了北极鹿旧的迁移方式—》北极鹿数量减少：
直接依据：1.当地猎人的报告
          2.全球变暖趋势同时（是偶然的吗）发生，导致冰块消融
间接依据：3.他们依靠冰块的移动来找寻食物
          4.食物生长环境温暖；
          5.一年的某些时候要冷，致使海水结冰能容忍这些小鹿穿越
攻击点在于：
1.猎人报告的可信度；
2.有没有可能是植物生长被破坏
3.此番巧合是否是人为造成；即报告披露时间问题







The statement in a wildlife journal presents that the numbers of arctic deer is declining according to the reports of local hunters, coinciding with recent global warming trends which may cause the ice to melt that is depended by these deer to search for food. Considering the reasons above, the author concludes that this decrease is just because the changes of their migration patterns across the frozen sea happen. In my analysis, the author fails to be well-reasoned for the conclusion.

Firstly, this report according to the local hunters, one the author cites,may be made lack of exact data, statistics and professional guidance. For example, arctic deer may immigrate into another place where the local hunters never or seldom dabble, which can lead a conclusion above. Without explicating sufficient information such as the area’s exact location, the methods of observations, the report deserves to be doubt as evidence.

Secondly, even if the report by the local ones is proven true, we also can’t state that there is a direct combination can be referred to the global warm tendency just for this report coinciding with
this trend. Maybe the phenomenon of deer decreasing exists all the time, however, the hunters just choose to expose it now because they fail to improve the condition, which seems as a result of the ice melt by global warm.

Finally, even if the report above declared in time, namely a link with the global warm indeed, we also should take some other elements into account. For example, with the climate’s change, that the plants on which the deer feed can’t adapt to the environment may also suffer from the diminishment, which can cause the deer to decrease when given fewer than before. However, in my opinion, another factor, one can’t be neglected by us, is that the deer may be killed indiscriminately by local hunters, can serve for the report. If the hunters are not aware of the diminishment of deer all the time, keep the quantity of deer killed as the same as before, and without taking any measures to solve it, the consequences of arctic deer’s decline obviously can be seen.

In sum, the speaker’s argument fails to expound the report’s information about the exact area, methods of observations clearly, neglects other factors may result in the conclusion such as the food they feed on, the local hunts itself, and also over-emphasizes the coincidence with the global warm tendency that without considering whether the report is exposed in time. As with these essences referred above, I could not accept this argument anyway.

yuanlinqinggreUID: 2755904

45.The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for
food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year.
Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on
which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice
to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over
it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer
populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global
warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that
the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable
to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."

逻辑分析：
原题中论据：
1北极鹿生活在加拿大极地区域的岛屿上。它们全年都通过冰块在岛屿间移动来寻找食物。它们的栖居地局限在那些温暖得足以维持它们所需的植物生长，并且在一年的至少某些时候冷到足以让岛屿间的海面结冰以使它们能够在岛屿间旅行的地方
2根据当地猎人的报告，鹿的数量正在下降
3这一报告正好与最近导致海洋冰面融化的全球变暖趋势同时发生
结论：
北极鹿数量的下降是它们无法按它们原有的迁移习惯穿越结冰海面的结果。
既作者的推理过程
鹿生存需要冰块+猎人报告鹿的数量减少+正好全球变暖——>鹿减少由于生存所需冰块没了——>鹿减少由于原有迁移习惯的被破坏
错误存在：
1 第一个论据中的描述互相存在悖论。既然全年都通过冰块间的移动而寻找食物，那么栖息地与欧温暖的足以维持他们生长所需的植物又有什么用呢？（虽然有想到，但是觉得不好写，就抛弃了这个）
2 猎人报告可信度质疑
3 全球变暖与鹿的下降同时发生不能推出互相之间的因果存在关系由于：
（1）
全球变暖不一定会影响到鹿的生存地的冰块融化
（2）
就算影响到了生存区冰块，那鹿的数量变少也不一定是迁移习惯受影响的原因也有可能因为他们被其他的动物给吃了等等
正文如下：
In the argument, the author concludes that the decline in arctic deer populations results from their failure to follow traditional migration patterns to cross the frozen sea. To uphold the conclusion, the author cites reports from local hunters and points out that the reports（这里用一个从句连接会否更好呢？which） coincide with the recent global warming trends. At first glance, the argument appears to be somehow plausible, however close scrutiny（赞一个） reveals that it is flawed（不知道用flaws是不是会更地道点） in several critical aspects.

In the first place, the argument is based on a questionable report from local hunters. Local hunters are people who have vested interests in hunting preys as many as possible, so it is possible they have killed large amount of deer and lie about it. Even assuming that hunters are honest, the report is still unlikely to reveal the truth. The seemingly（好词）
decline in the number arctic deer observed by hunters might not objectively reflect the real（the actual change in the ） population of deer. For example, it is entirely possible that hunters are living in a limited area and fail to have(用定语从句是可以表达出因果关系which limited their) chances to observe the whole population. Or perhaps deer have migrated to other areas when the ice can cover the sea, thus giving（赞） the hunters an illusion that the deer population are decreasing. Therefore, lacking the pertinent information, the report cited is highly suspected.

Secondly, even if I were to concede（好词） that the report is convincing, the author overlooks the possibility that the global warming trends might have no effects on the specific region mentioned in the argument. Common knowledge informs me that some places have very thick ice layer and not all sea ice areas are affected by the global warming. Perhaps arctic deer are living on the places covered by vast ice sheets reaching a thickness of several kilometers that are unlikely to be melting in a short time.

Thirdly, granted（好词）
that the specific region mentioned in the argument is also affected by the global warming trends, the author commits a fallacy of "cum hoc ergo propter hoc（这个是什么意思呢？）" in assuming that the decline in arctic deer populations is attributable to the melting sea ice due to the recent global warming trends. However, it is not necessarily the case. Many other possible factors can explain the phenomenon. For example, perhaps they are killed by hunters who want to obtain their horns and furs. Or perhaps they fall prey to other large carnivores, such as arctic bears and wolves. It is also entirely possible that arctic deer cannot adapt to the changing environmental conditions brought about by natural processes. Without ruling out or even considering the alternative explanations, it would be groundless to simply attribute the decline in arctic deer populations to the global warming trends.

In sum, the argument rests on several ambiguous assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author must provide firm evidence that the reports are reliable and failure to follow traditional migration is the only reason results in the decline of deer populations. To better evaluate the argument, the author should lend more information about the circumstances of ice layers on the specific region mentioned in the argument.

又是我改你的文章啊^ ^

这次改完文章后，发现你的文章的结构已经十分完整，上次出现的有些段落的不充实问题也得到了很好的解决。词句方面的进步也十分明显。整体进步如此之快，在此不得不赞一下。
以下是我对你文章的分析：
1 词句：现在已经可以尝试着去使用定语从句了，这样可以使你的句子更为多彩。
2 文章结构：整体上我觉得十分的好，但是我注意到了你论证段的第二段有点内容不足，并且段尾缺乏一个小小的总结。
3 逻辑结构：

这次文章的逻辑结构在你以上的分析中已经十分清晰了，攻击也基本到位。所以我就不赘述了。我在这里想讨论一下，文中作者给出的鹿的习性这一论据是否可以攻击。因为我觉得作者对于习性的描写过于模糊，无论是草的适宜生长的温度，还是冰要厚到可以让鹿在上面走的温度。所以我们是否可以在这方面挖掘一下呢？当然，我自己也对此毫无头绪。

总结：进步十分明显，对逻辑链的攻击也十分到位，主要需要注意的是进一步充实文章的论证内容，并且开始对词句的使用提高要求。

cynthia313UID: 2765794

Argue45 by weli 修改 By Cynthia
The argument get a conclusion( 不知道有没有这种搭配啊~~)that the decline of arctic(大写） deer populations is because of deer’s losing their age-old migration patterns’ way to cross the frozen sea. At first, the editorial introduces the habits of arctic deer, which will travel over the ice in cold days. But recent global warming trends to cause the sea ice to melt, so the author thinks it may make deer unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. (这句话显得有点口语化，这样改会不会要好些呢：Recent global warming trends to cause the sea ice to melt, which, according to the author's statement, would hinder the deer following ....)And local hunters found the deer populations were declining. So the writer said(太口语了） that’s for the disappearing of ice ways, which connected many islands. However, the logic is unreasonable and problematic in some respects.
Firstly, the report(reports) from local hunters that the deer populations are declining doesn’t mean the whole arctic deer populations are truly cutting down. It can only certify that the deer living near local hunters is(are) becoming less. Maybe many of them, for the global warming, immigrate to a place northerner than local hunters’ houses, but the whole populations of them are (still) likely to growing.
Even we assume that the place(place=local??) hunters living all over Canada and the quantity of deer is exactly down, the conclusion is still questionable. Because there are many other reasons can result in the decline of deer populations,nevertheless the author didn’t(does not) rule out other causes (away删掉). For instance, the global warming is possible to get(cause) the death of many plants, which are article(Arctic) deer’s food. At last(Consequently个人觉得这里用一个表因果关系的连词比较恰当), the number of deer is cutting down for lack(lacking) of food.Finally, there is no proof of the disappearing of ice way connecting islands. (两个of读起来很别扭……建议可以改成同位语从句形式：there is no proof that the ice ways which connect islands are disappearing)Maybe global warming just causes the ice way’s generating later than before,（删掉 but，这里不是转折关系吧~） deer can still follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. It’s not the real reason which makes deer’s population down.
In sum, if there are(were) more details report(reported) about the quantity of arctic deer, more analysis of the declining of deer, the conclusion will be more appropriate. The influence of global warm(warming) should also be known well enough to find whether it makes deer unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. If the author could rule out other cause(causes/factors) （删掉away）, it(it指代不明the argument) would be more logical. Anyway, I don’t agree with the conclusion.(太口语）
这篇文章逻辑清晰，采用递进式攻击较为有力。有几点小建议：
1.文章有些用语太口语了，显得不够专业，比如最后一句话，就显得很主观。如果改成：One can not easily accept this questionable conclusion without further information.意思差不多，会不会显得要专业些呢？另外还有文章中像the author thinks/says...这种表达也太口语了，可以改用claim/assert/assume/state等比较书面的用词。
2.首段过长，比后面攻击逻辑点的段都还要长，显得喧宾夺主。对逻辑点的攻击可以再展开写，要不首段删减了估计字数又不够了。

elevenkarUID: 2791267

1 arctic deer 通过moving over ice 来觅食
2 为什么他们生活的岛屿要warm enough to sustain the plant they feed?
3 local hunter, 这个职业给予的所谓的populations的降低时可疑的。
4 报告的来源
in the reports already admit that it was coin side, so we recognize the relation between the two sides, but we cannot ignore the other factors.

In this argument, the writer of this article concludes that global warming caused a decline in the number of deer which live in Canada’s arctic region. To support his or her conclusion, the writer cites a report from a local hunter and reveals a fact that these deer search for food by moving over ice to island. However, after a strict analysis, there are several doubts come into my mind.

First of all, the argument is based on only one reports（report） from one local hunters’ reports（report）. When one accepts the conclusion, he or she cannot ignore the reporters’ status. It is not necessary for a group of hunters to analysis why the population of arctic deer is decline. They must find this phenomenon from their daily life, and they blame this to global warming（是否考虑用定于从句which is blamed by them to global warming？）. As the hunters themselves say in the reports that it was just coin side which means that they cannot provide any reliable and believable data to show the relationship between deer’s population and global warming. For example, it is entirely possible that local hunters killed a quantity of arctic deer and other deer migrate to other region which has less （fewer）hunters.

Secondly, there is a paradox（好词） in this argument. The writer says that arctic deer need to feed themselves by moving over ice during the course of the year,
however what comes next is that their habitat is warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed. There is no need for them to moving over ice for that they have enough food to sustain, and the global warming will do not influence them at all. So there must be many other reasons which cause the declination of deer’s population.
Finally, even we assume that these deer need to survival through different kinds of food which they cannot get from their habitat only, the conclusion that the decline of arctic deer cannot only blame to global warming. The reason they moving over ice are to find food, however, the way they find food is not only limited to this. If we take this into consideration, the real problem cause the declination is the lack of some specific sort of food instead of global warming.

In summary, the writer fails to establish any causal relationship between deer’s population and weather change, so it was obviously that the final account can only be coincidence instead of persuaded. The evidence presented is extremely weak at best and narrowly focuses on a group of hunters in one region, as well as their partial reports. For a stronger argument, the writer would need to directly conduct a survey by scientists which would consider not only weather problems but also diversity issues in this region in Canada.

文章行文很流畅，给人一种一气呵成之感。语法与句法错误也很少，可见作者的英语语言功底之强。
以下给予文章攻击内容上的一些建议
本人认为此argument中比较明显的有一个 “时序因过错误”，既原文的逻辑推理是这样的：
鹿生存需要冰块+猎人报告鹿的数量减少+正好全球变暖——>鹿减少由于生存所需冰块没了——>鹿减少由于原有迁移习惯的被破坏
而全球变暖与鹿的下降同时发生不能推出互相之间的因果存在关系由于：
（1）全球变暖不一定会影响到鹿的生存地的冰块融化
（2）就算影响到了生存区冰块，那鹿的数量变少也不一定是迁移习惯受影响的原因也有可能因为他们被其他的动物给吃了

作者文章中的第二点是我很想写而没敢写的，看了你的文章后，我觉得论证的很生动，让我受益良多。
但是若再充实文章内容加入对以上我列出的一点的逻辑攻击，作者的文章必然更加完美。

lxklysUID: 2738043

60# yuanlinqinggre
TOPIC: ARGUMENT45 - The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."
WORDS: 468
TIME: 00:35:00
DATE: 2010-4-23 20:35:29

The author, in a wildlife journal, reaches his conclusion that the decline in the number of arctic deer is resulted from(result…from的意思就是be the effect of，所以此句不用被动语态) being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns. To validate his conclusion, the editor provides both the habits of arctic deer and the report from local hunters. Yet, further reflection will reveal that the ratiocination（这词我收了） is unpersuasive as it stands.
Firstly, the global warming trend mentioned above is little indication that sea ice in Canada's arctic region is melting. Lacking prominent evidence that the sea ice in areas where arctic deer live, we can assumes that sea ice in Canada arctic region is not affected by the global warming trend for its unique geologic terrain which keep sea ice from melting.（这个用来反驳的论据我觉得不是很到位，文中的逻辑是：全球变暖进而融化冰块，从而改变了鹿群的迁移方式，你的重点在怀疑全球变暖不一定使得当地冰块融化，你的论据是那里的地形会限制冰块融化，这个太具有典型性和偶然性了，一般好像都没有地形限制融化说，不是很可靠。因为如果它成立的话，那是不是可以人工造地形的方法去阻挡冰块的融化呢？当然，以上只是我自己的观点，仅供参考哈。O(∩_∩)O~）
Therefore, without providing convincing evidence that sea ice in areas where arctic deer live, the editor cannot persuade me of the basis of the conclusion that sea ice is melting, let alone that melting sea ice keeps deer from migrating.

Secondly, since the editor shows no evidence that report from local hunters is effective and reliable, it is entirely possible that the number of arctic deer which is seen by hunters has decreased whereas the population of arctic deer remains stable. For that matter, their habitat may have changed because of the development of human society（随着人类社会的发展，他们的栖息地就可能改变？这个推理跨度有点大捏，不如改成人类活动吧，或者再具体阐述一下，你觉得呢）, which leads to fewer arctic deer was seen by local hunters. Moreover, lacking definite number of the decline, the author cannot eliminate the possibility that little fluctuation in the population of arctic deer result in this decline which is too small to taking into account. Thus, until the editor provides compelling（好词，收了）study concerning the decline in the population of arctic deer, I remain doubtful that this is the case.

Thirdly, even assuming that population of arctic deer is declining, which coincide with the melting sea ice in that area, the author fails to eliminate（由于上文已经出现了这个词，为了展示词语的多样性，换个exclude如何捏） other factors which may greatly effect the population of arctic deer. For that matter, it is just as likely that the amount of plants which arctic deer feed on is declining greatly owing to the pollution, in which case pollution may lead to the decrease in the population. And it is also not presumptuous(我收啦) for us to assume that diseases(a disease) which is fatal when arctic deer is affected(我知道你要表的的意思，但是能不能换种方式表达呢，感觉比较饶) is responsible for the decline. As a result, the author have to ruling out possible reasons for the decline, otherwise he cannot confidently reach his justification.

In sum, the article is lucid, however, unconvincing. To better assess the argument, it is indispensable for the author to provide a study related to the condition of sea ice in Canada's arctic region and a study concerning the population of arctic deer as well. Moreover, to strengthen the ratiocination, the editor must eliminate other factors which may serve to the decline.
总体评价：
首先，不得不佩服楼主强悍的文字功底，以及能在这么短时间内就能完成这篇ARGU，膜拜中啊……
如果要说问题的话，主要存在一下几个：
第一，驳斥的大方向都对，但有些论据的选择我觉得不是很恰当，上面已经标示出；
第二，这是个个人建议哈，就是能不能在找到驳斥的点的时候，能不能使得他们以一种更有逻辑的形式组织起来呢，就是说每个段都有一种递进或者其他的关系；
第三，就是开头若能够把作者的思想，也就是逻辑链用语言展现出来的话，就更棒了；
第四，就是一些小的语法和单词等粗心的错误，望注意一下啦；
总的说来，实在是太佩服楼主的功力了，加油加油了。

weili0612UID: 2767606

Argue45 by Cynthia
逻辑链：
1.Arctic deer生活在这样的地方：足够温暖又足够的食物，足够冷可以让海结冰，让deer可以跨海寻找食物
2.全球变暖引起冰融化
3.deer数量减少(supported by local hunters' reports)
4.deer减少是由于global warming引起海面冰融化，导致deer不能跨海寻找食物~
攻击点：
1.local hunters' reports'的可信度
2.global warming对deer生活的地方不一定有影响，就算有影响也不一定能达到让海面冰层融化的程度
3.就算海面上的冰溶解了，deer可以游泳啊，或者气候的变暖提供了更多是食物，它们根本不用跑来跑去寻找食物啦
4.其它因素也能导致deer数量减少，作者未能排除
In this analysis, the arguer claims that global warming trends, which cause the sea ice melting, is responsible for the decrease of Arctic deer population in Canada, since the deer can not move over the ice of the sea to search for food. This argument, which sounds lucid and logical at first glance, suffers from several critical fallacies.（经典啊，既简介又概述了ARGUMENT的内容！）

To support the statement, the arguer cites the reports of local hunters to justify the populations of Arctic deer are declining. However, the reliability of the reports is still open to question.（好句子） The local hunters might just find the populations of the deer are declining in a limited area where they inhabit in. They might have not counted all the deer in Canada to reach in a scientific conclusion. It is possible that the deer around the hunters disappeared just because of over hunting, which has little affect of total deer population. It is equally possible that the deer immigrate to other places where there are no hunters disturbing them. Thus, the result of local hunters' reports that the populations of Arctic deer are decreasing is groundless.（我不是很懂啊，population什么时候用复数，什么时候不加S啊，我基础不好，自己写的时候全和材料一样加了S）

Even if the decrease of deer populations is true, the evidence provided in this argument is still not sufficient to validate the assumption that the deer are disappearing because of global warming. The arguer's statement is based on an unreasonable assumption that the global warming must have an effect on the region where inhabits Arctic deer. However, no direct evidence is provided to support this questionable assumption. Perhaps, Canada still stay cold while the global is warming or the extent of the warming is not enough causing ice melting of the sea. Without direct evidence to justify the ice of the sea is melting because of global warming, the arguer's statement is severely weakened.

Furthermore, granted that the global warming leads to the ice melting, the arguer still can not simply assume that the ice melting leads to the decrease of deer populations. It is possible that the warmer climate bring about more food, the deer are no longer necessary to travel across the sea for food. It is also possible that the deer would adapt themselves to the melting ice, perhaps they would swim across the sea instead of traveling over the ice.

What's more, the arguer does not rule out other factors might leads to the decrease of the deer populations, such as over hunting, lacking of food caused by forests destroying, etc. No direct evidence is given to support the assertion that it is global warming that cause deer populations declining rather than other factors.

In conclusion, this argument is unconvincing because of several logical fallacies; the arguer fails to establish the causal relationship between global warming and deer populations' declining. Thus, one can not easily accept this unconvincing analysis without further information.

语言方面就不多夸了，红的是用的好的，就population我很confuse,不知道什么是有s什么时候不加。

有关逻辑链，我觉得是这样的：
1、
介绍鹿的习性
2、
猎户发现鹿少了
3、
全球变暖了，可是使冰融化
4、
又（1）猎户发现鹿少，推出加拿大鹿少了（1个不合理）
5、
全球变暖推出加拿大那里冰化了（第二个，少证据）
6、
以前鹿要靠冰跨岛，现在冰少啦，而且鹿也少了。为什么鹿少了呢？就因为没冰啦，老地方结不出冰啦。（这个又不合理了，鹿少因为没路了？）

所以作者Furthermore那段感觉不知道攻击了哪里，就说冰融化不能推出鹿少了（the arguer still can not simply assume that the ice melting leads to the decrease of deer populations），但是后面的possible没说鹿少，也没说鹿少时因为什么，就说鹿觅食的方法变了，可以游泳，可以不用到处找吃的，感觉和作者要证明的东西无关。

toywangUID: 2700880

第四次作业  ARUMENT 45
用时：由于被BS打断~，思维断了一下。总共写了差不多1个至1个半小时
作者观点：
1．猎人报告鹿的数量减少
2．近期报告说明全球变暖导致冰层融化。
1+2→二者同时发生，说明是由于鹿的迁徙通道被切断而导致鹿无法觅食，数量减少。
反对观点：
1．猎人的报告并不能说明鹿真的减少了。可能是鹿北迁移离开了猎人居住的地方。
2．题目所给信息未表明，全球变暖导致鹿群迁徙通道中断。At least
3．即使二者成立了，也可能是别的原因导致鹿的数量减少。比如说偷猎者，食物减少。
1+2+3→作者观点不成立
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grounding on [这个用法不错]the report which claiming the decline of the Arctic deer, and synthesizing with the Simultaneous fact that the recent global warming trends have caused the sea ice to melt, the arguer deduced that decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.第一段把题目很好的总结了，用词也很变化，都有学到~~~
However, what the hunters’ report can’t 【为什么用cannot啊？】be taken for【是否应该用as啊？】 the compelling evidence to prove that the arctic deer do in decline. There is a possibility that those arctic deer may move north 【用somewhere吧】due to the warming climate. At this circumstance, the local hunters will definitely find that the deer population was declining【是not declining吧？】. Even those arctic deer never migrant at all, how much can we rely on the figure that those hunters reported? The reason why a figure in a science report is creditable lies in 【relay on？】those scientific, substantiated, authentic statistical methods behind it. Then what statistical method did the local hunters used to count the number of arctic deer? Maybe they do the calculating work through sampling survey, but the big error caused by the undirectional motion of those deer may fill up the declined number. What’s more, those hunters can’t trace those deer like zoologist usually does. They can only count the deer they met, which just lessen the reliability of the report.

Granting that the deer population do decreased, the argument above 【这个above有歧义，直接去掉】can’t give any convincing proof to testifying the causal relation between the global warming and the discontinuance of the passage for deer migration. The text above indicating that the temperature of deer’s habitat should be cold enough for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. But it just required for a period time of the year to meet the request. Though the situation of global warming does allow for no optimist, but does it warm enough to halt the icing process of the seawater that cutting the deer’s foraging way for the whole year? We can’t exclude the odds that the ices melted now just near the Arctic region, which means no influence on the ice in arctic region at all. And even some ices within arctic region began to melt, we still not reason enough to deduce that the ices within Canada’s arctic region are melting now. Nor can we conduct that the seawater around deer’s habitat do can’t be frozen anymore.
我觉得这个攻击点比较弱，也有可能冰确实化了不能过呢？

To say the least, even the two hypotheses was【were】 true, the combination of those two factor【factors】 still not compelling enough to support the assertion【接一个句子解释下子assertion吧】. Poaching 【what kind of poaching?】may contribute to the decline of deer population. And the changing climate may lead to the decrease of the plants on which deer feed, what should be responsible for the declining deer too.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. The arguer should collect more references and do more research [researches] to exclude any other possible reason[reasons] for the decrease in arctic deer populations[population]. all scientific conclusion[conclusions] should based on the sound logic. 这里怎么这么多单复数问题呢？不是你的风格啊~~~~最后一段时典型的建议型，但是觉得有点中庸

好话就不说了，
我觉得这篇的逻辑找到不清楚，或者说攻击点不强，我们晚上可以讨论一下~~~~

yuanlinqinggreUID: 2755904

TOPIC: ISSUE50 - "In order to improvethe quality of instruction at the college and university level, all facultyshould be required to spend time working outside the academic world inprofessions relevant to the courses they teach."
WORDS: 661


Does the quality of instruction, which isgreatly responsible for the competence of students when they step into society,need to be advanced? I think the answer is yes. Since the academic world aswell as the world is changing at a fast speed, instruction, including the wayof teaching and the knowledge to be taught, cannot remain unchanged. Yet, toserve the goal, not all the professors in all fields should spend time workingoutside the campus because of difference among diverse fields.

Instruction, defined as the process ofprofessor's teaching which includes the way of teaching and what to teach,should be advanced through time, since the development of science andtechnology has provided the professors a wide range of better choice to presentwhat they what to teach. Many years ago, professors presented their coursesmainly by text books, which seems insipid to most students, whereas, thanks tothe rapid development in mass media, professors can give students a better viewof what they want to teach, especially in fields like history, by presents repertoryfilms. When it comes to economy, professors can easily construct a graphconcerning the relationship between unemployment and inflation rate by justtyping some data into the computer. Moreover, since the academic world is alsochanging rapidly, knowledge to be taught should also be advanced from time totime. Since the quality can be measured by the way of teaching and knowledge tobe taught, it is necessary to advance the quality.

In some fields which focus on practicalsituations, the quality of instruction can be advanced by requiring professorto working outside the campus, provided that time spent outside is limited. Infields, such as engineering and software, things do not always go as thetextbook has expected, since problems are common when it comes to practicalsituation which is hard to imagine according to knowledge learned fromtextbook. For that matter, effective measures to deal with these problems havebeen developed in commercial companies, for they have to minimize their cost soas to maximize their profits. As a result, it is indispensable for professors,in order to teach students both practical and theoretic knowledge, to spendtime working in such companies to catch up with knowledge developed inpractical situations. Nonetheless, a limit must be cast on time spent, sinceprofessors' spending too much time working outside the campus
may distract their attention from teachingwhich may serve to a negative result.


Although there is no doubt that the qualityof instruction should be improved, effective methods to achieve the goaldiffers among different fields. In fields, such as history and literature,which focus on theoretical researches, holding a frequent colloquium, insteadof requiring faculty in these fields working outside, is more practical andeffective. On the one hand, society outside the campus provides few jobs forprofessors in these fields, in which case not all professors can find a appropriatevacation. On the other hand, colloquia, which gathers scholar in such fieldstogether, may provide precious opportunities for professors who can hardly meetwith each other to discuss and debate, which can facilitate the advent ofbetter theory. And then, professors can teach their students something new,giving students a clear view of new theory in academic fields they work inWorking outside campus may provide practical experience for professors, fromwhich fields that focus on theoretical researches can not benefit. Therefore, bettermethods to advance the quality of instruction vary when it comes to differentfields.

In sum, as the world is changing rapidly,both improvement in technology ,which provides professors a better way toteach, and advancement in academic fields, which requires professor to enlargewhat they are to teach, call for development ing the quality of instruction.Requirement that all faculty should work outside campus are effective in somefields, however, not practical when it comes to all the fields, in which case effectiveways to achieve the goal varies among diverse fields.

toywangUID: 2700880

Issue 50
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 course they teach.

With the fast change speed of our society, we have to update our knowledge in order to catch up with the time. Grounding on this trend, the suggestion to ask faculty work outside the academic world is inescapable from the angle both faculties themselves and students who received education.

Working outside will serve for the improving of instruction quality in several aspects. It is easy for us to find that most of the fence between college and society has been pulled down in western countries, however, the thought was not beyond the campus. Based on this phenomenon, many successful people in difference businesses come to first-class university to give lecture and even take some specific part-time job. For example, several presidents of banks and companies were invited to be honorary professor of economics for their strong application of the knowledge in textbooks. It has already illustrates a high pressure for the faculty only work in the academic field. No matter professors or instructors, they all need to update their knowledge with the changeable world, and only hold the most fresh knowledge the college and university can prove their quality of teaching ultimately.

In addition, as the CEO of apple company, Steve Jobs ever said that information is knowledge, the connection with outside world will provide the faculty and students a new state which will not limited to campus. It has been a question for many educationalists that what does higher education do for most citizens? The answers by most people who received the higher education are that they want to get a better job or their own career. This expectation demand faculty work out of the academic world, and only through this way college faculty will get working experience in relevant professions in order to help students adjust from campus to the job market. What’s more, the application of knowledge is more complicated than what present in textbooks, while the process need a guide who could do any proposals before. If a college or university lack of faculty who have no working experience, the students there will lose at the beginning.

Even the necessity of working outside has been discussed above, while the chosen of what kind of faculty should work outside should be investigated. As to the aim of higher education talk over before, there must be exist some people who want to have further study in their own field. For this sort of professors and students, the practice of working out of academic world will distribute their focus on studies and reaches. Despite to this situation, the advantages of working outside are based the fulfill of their work in academic world, going too far is as bad as not going far enough, meaning redundant outside work may do harm to instruction.

In sum, the importance of working outside cannot be denied, however, the balance of the working outside and inside are more essential. Only through a way which each part of them play a appropriate proportion, the goal that improve the quality of instruction will be achieved. What I want to recommend at last is that the chosen of relevant job also need to pay attention, cause the selection of job will response to the experience which will effectual or not.

elevenkarUID: 2791267

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: 454
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2010-4-26 21:29:59

Confucius, one of the greatest and most influential philosophers and educators in ancient China, was quoted in the Analects as saying, "Teachers are the most effective helper for students." The author claims that all teachers should work outside the academic world in professions related to his or her field of study. According to me, whether the teacher should work outside depends on what kind of courses he or she teaches.

Some practice courses need experienced teachers as instructor to better prepare students for their future careers. Not all students are going to higher their education and do research work after graduation. Most of them will choose to work in a company or a department of a country, which require practice skills instead of only theoretical knowledge. However, universities are the places concentrating on academic knowledge. Professors as well as teachers tend to focus on academic goal thus certain practice skills are ignored. What's more, students cannot find a decent job if they only possess theoretical knowledge. A real intellectual graduate should combine theoretical knowledge with practical knowledge and apply them into work. Consequently, professors who lack working experience have to spend time working outside the academic world to gain certain experience in the field they teach. For example, software engineering is a major which requires code experience in programming. Only when instructors go to the company to obtain the newest knowledge and information can they truly teach students and impart them real knowledge.

Some theoretical courses do not need teachers who have working experience outside the academic world but need scholars who have deep understanding of a professional field. Some courses including mathematics, literature and physics require little knowledge in practice. Professors majoring in these fields usually become researchers only after his or her graduation in universities. According to a recent survey conducted by Peking University, half of its faculty have no working experience outside the academic world and one third of them are distinguish professors. Therefore, no practical skills are needed for professors who teach theoretical courses.

Different fields of study have different standards for teachers. Universities have diverse departments majoring in various fields of study. For different majors, school should provide different methods to improve the quality of instruction. Fundamental courses, including mathematics, physics, literature and the like prefer prominent professors who are well-known in certain fields. Engineering courses, including computer science, electronics, mining and the like prefer teachers who have a lot of working experience.

To sum up, due to detailed analysis and reasons mentioned above, which correlate with each time that render it more convincing as a whole, we can comfortably say that whether school should send teachers to work completely depends on which field he or she studies in.