【1010G精英组】ARGUMENT169 Ambition组回收站

lvruochenUID: 2792806

注意及时上交，及时修改，谢谢
注意今天还有一个Issue
注意晚上的BS

lvruochenUID: 2792806

169The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.

"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."

537 Words
60 Minutes

According to some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is located in a small town like Pierce University, revealing that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed nearby, the arguer claims that Pierce University should order employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire to attract gifted professors and to improve morale of the entire staff. That sounds to be a brilliant idea. Nevertheless, the proposal will actually spend money in a less effective and efficient way.

To begin with, the studies made by Bronston College can not be put into use immediately in Pierce University, and it remains to be questioned whether the result can be the same in different places. Putting aside the vagueness of the studies in Bronston College, which lack exact statistics and thus are less convincible, let us just consider if the result made in Bronston College can be adopted in Pierce University. Although they both lie in small towns, which are usually a less fun place and provides less entertainment than big cities, it is arbitrary to say the circumstances are similar. What if Pierce University locates near a city, while Bronston College sites in a more remote place? Spouses of faculty members in Bronston College can hardly find any job nearby. But spouse of each faculty member in Pierce University can find job easier in the city, which is in the same geographic area to some extent. Such proposal can be misleading since the different conditions of the two schools.

Even if we concede that the job offered by university to spouses of faculty members is also a essential factor in Pierce University, that condition is not the only way to attract teachers and researchers. When a person considers a job in universities, the spouse's job is not the only factor that forces him to determine where to go. It is prestige, equipment, salary, working atmosphere, location, and personal goal that count more at the option. Though, there are some factors we cannot change, we can still do something. Why not save that money for the spouses and give higher salary to professors? Why not use that money to improve equipment conditions? How about use that money to conduct some lectures to improve the studying atmosphere? Those means above can be effective and economical, while, in the contrary, offering job to spouses can become a burden of the university in the future, for they are less likely to be important in the university.

What is more, there are more approaches to improve faculty members' morale. Making faculty happier can be achieved by many waya. If living there is various, morale will definitely be improved. For example, seminar can be conducted to improve both the relationship of faculty members and the morale, while making researchers' ideas contacted. Clubs for entertainment can be founded. Stadium can be built. Much can be done.

All in all, the money prepared for the spouses can be used in many different more effective, efficient, and economical ways to gain the same goal. We should think twice before the money is spent whether the proposal, in the future, is a gift or merely a burden for the university.

whiteoutUID: 2699068

The author of this letter concludes that in order to attract the most gifted teachers and researchers, the president of Pierce University should offer employment of new faculty member’s spouses. However, this argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

A threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the studies conducted by Bronston College. One unsubstantiated assumption about this is that both male female professors would rather like to live in small towns with their spouses employed in the same area. Yet logic and common sense inform us that the result might have been due instead to one or more other factors. Perhaps there are just a part of people who prefer to live in small town responding to the study. Or perhaps this is just a coincidence that professors who are happier living in small towns and whose spouses are employed in the same area are the same group of samples. Moreover, the author provides no evidence that the number of respondents is statistically significant or that the respondents were representative of all the professors working in universities. Thus, the author cannot convince me that the results of these studies are reliable.

Even assuming it is the fact that professors are more likely to live in small towns when their spouses are also working in the same area, the author ignores the possibility that this method may not make sense when it involved Pierce faculty although it works with Bronston faculty. It is entirely possible the environment of the town where Bronston College lies is much better than the town where Pierce University lies. Perhaps the former town is a great place with appropriate weather and good living conditions which are the key reasons why professors choose to live in. Yet this is not necessarily the case in the latter town. Then the result cited in the studies by Bronston College is a poor indication and has little reference for Pierce University.

Additionally, the author unfairly assumes that professors pay much attention to whether their spouses are employed in the same place so that they could consider in a further step whether they could choose this university and live in small towns. What might contribute to the decisions for these teachers and researchers to choose a university most are the ranks, infrastructures, academic research capacity, instead of whether the university is in a small town or a big city. The author overlooks the meaning or the function of where the faculty’s spouses are, let alone the unjustifiable conclusion that offering employment to the spouse of each new faculty member could help to improve the morale of entire staff.

In conclusion, the argument is untenable in light of a variety of alternative explanations for the results of the studies. To strengthen it, the author must show that the studies conducted by Bronston College are reliable and representative in the tow towns. To better evaluate the argument, we would need to know whether teachers and researchers place much emphasis on the places where their spouses are employed.

lvruochenUID: 2792806

注意
今天还有一个Issue
最近改成每天一个了

annkeUID: 2605122

GOOOOD！！！ 疯了~

TOPIC: ARGUMENT169 - The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.

"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."
WORDS: 296
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-5-13 21:30:49

This argument proposes that Pierce University should invest money on offering employment to the spouse of each new faculty member hired, by this means can the university attract the most gifted teachers and researchers as well as improve the morale of their entire staff, which seems plausible considering to the studies conducted by Bronston College. However, several sneakering logic flaws strongly weaken the proposal's reliability .
First of all, without providing relevant information---such as the sample numbers, and the sampling process---the studies conducted by Bronston College are unwarranted. Moreover, the results of surveys do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that Bronston College has an excellent faculty, because the only fact, that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area, is not sufficient to prove the conclusion. In addition, the author do not identify that the small town Bronston College located belongs to the small towns professors prefer to live in. As there are many other small towns across the country, it is probably that professor would like to live in other small tows rather than the small town Bronston College due to possible reasons that this town is noticeable for unsafety and poverty. Hence, the author makes a false assumption that the studies conducted by Bronston College are believable and Bronston College has an advantage of preeminent faculty and professors prefer to live in the small town where the college locate.
Secondly,if all the assumption are temporarily regarded as true, another serious logical flaw is also unavoidable in the argument that there is no information demonstrating that Bronston College achieves an outstanding faculty due to adoption of the policy that investing money to attract professors' spouse to work in the town. Actually, this policy itself should be questioned. Common sense tells us most people choose a position in certain place result from factors like salary, promotion, and working environment. Therefore, whether professors would go a university predominately depend on whether the university could afford an compelling salary, whether the university own suitable equipment and staff for their academic research, rather than simply whether their spouses are offered jobs or not. Consequently, not only crucial information is absent in the argument, but also fallacious reasoning immerges.
Besides, even though we assume that Bronston benefit a lot from policy to provision jobs for professors' spouses,
the similarity between Bronston College and Pierce University, which both are located in a small town cannot necessarily effectiveness, totally cannot prove the similar benefits will occur in Pierce University. It is highly possible that there are a great many differences between Bronston University and Pierce University, for example, the latter is not as famous as the former, the working conditions in latter university is too poor to compare with the former. In these cases, even Pierce University copy the policy of Bronston University, the outcomes may turn out to be disappointment.
In a nut shell, this argument is not convincing to draw a conclusion that investment on offering employment to the spouse of each new faculty member hired can assist the university attract the most gifted teachers and researchers as well as improve the morale of their entire staff, neither does to
adopt the policy by Pierce University.
[/fly]

xiaohaixxxUID: 2317561

169, the following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.
"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."
8:35-9:00
In this letter, the department chairperson proposed to hire all spouses of new faculties in order to attract the most gifted teachers and researchers and improve the morale of our entire staff, for some studies conducted by Bronston College show that “both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area.”, however there are several illogical points in this letter as follows:
First of all, the studies that reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area are conduct by Bronston College but not by Pierce University. Though the author mentioned that both Bronston College and Pierce University are located in a small town, the only similar point cannot prove the condition in Bronston College will also exist in Pierce University. There several other factors can make things different; for Bronston College may be located in a small town near by a big city and its residents’ live is very convenient. So even Bronston College is located in a small town, its faculty will not feel any uncomfortable and what they consider is just their spouses’ job. Meanwhile, Pierce University may be located at a outlying small city, both live and traffic are inconvenient. Therefore, the faculties in Pierce University may consider the school’s location first, but not their spouses’ job and even though Pierce University provides its new faculties’ spouses job, the most gifted teachers and researchers may also be reluctant to work in the Pierce University.

Moreover, even if the conclusion of the studies, which conducted by Bronston College is also effective in Pierce University. The Pierce University needn’t hire all its new faculties’ spouses, for not all its faculties are most gifted teachers and researchers, and not evidence can prove hire these people’s spouse can improve the morale of our entire staff. On contrary, many old faculties may not work with their spouses in a same area. So if Pierce University hire all new faculties’ spouses but ignore theirs, how would these old faculties think? So the author’s suggestion that Pierce University should hire all new faculties’ spouses is also open to doubt.

What’s more, there may exists more effective method to attract the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improve the morale of our entire staff, but cost less money comparing with the suggestion in the letter. For example why not the Pierce University raise its faculties’ salary？ why not the Pierce University updates its laboratory or open new research center in city? And why not the Pierce University do effort to raise its academic reputation to attract most gifted teachers and researchers?

All in all, the letter contents several illogical points, and the author fails to convince us his suggestion.

whiteoutUID: 2699068

According to some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is located in a small town like Pierce University, revealing that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed nearby, the arguer claims that Pierce University should order[这里取“安排”的意思还是什么?] employment to the spouse of each new faculty member they hire to attract gifted professors and to improve morale of the entire staff.[好长的第一句话~] That sounds to be a brilliant idea. Nevertheless, the proposal will actually spend[cost] money in a less effective and efficient way[effective和efficient是否重复?].

To begin with, the studies made by Bronston College can not be put into use immediately in Pierce University[这句主语是否有问题?不是studies这些研究不能被应用于这里而是研究得出的结论或者建议吧], and it remains to be questioned whether the result can be the[去掉] same in different places. Putting aside the vagueness of the studies in Bronston College, which lack exact statistics and thus are less convincible, let us just consider if the result made in Bronston College can be adopted in Pierce University. Although they[指代突兀，不如直接说the two universities] both lie in small towns, which are usually a less fun place[less fun places] and provides[s去掉] less entertainment than big cities, it is arbitrary[合适否…?] to say the circumstances are similar. {What if Pierce University locates near a city, while Bronston College sites in a more remote place? Spouses of faculty members in Bronston College can hardly find any job nearby. But spouse of each faculty member in Pierce University can find job easier in the city, which is in the same geographic area to some extent. Such proposal can be misleading since the different conditions of the two schools.}这段没怎么看明白：是说B学校在很偏远的地方所以配偶在附近找不到工作不得不在本地就业？同时P学校离城市很近，他们很容易在城市找工作？那么“which is in the same geographic area to some extent”又想表达什么呢？我以为你想说因为B是上述这种情况他们是不得不在本地工作所以才得出了题中那个结论，而P离城市很近在城里很容易工作，所以B的结论在P这里不成立；所以我搞不懂为什么又说某种程度上这也属于同一地区…理解能力有限~~求解~~~
Even if we concede that the job offered by university to spouses of faculty members is also a essential factor in Pierce University, that condition is not the only way to attract teachers and researchers. When a person considers a job in universities, the spouse's job is not the only factor that forces him to determine where to go. It is prestige, equipment, salary, working atmosphere, location, and personal goal that count more at[这个搭配我不熟，感觉上用in，如果是固定搭配就忽略我吧~] the option. Though, [需要加逗号吗？]there are some factors we cannot change, we can still do something. Why not save that money for the spouses and give higher salary[salaries] to professors? Why not use that money to improve equipment conditions[这种搭配OK？]? How about use[using] that money to conduct some lectures to improve the studying atmosphere? Those means above can be effective and economical, while, in the contrary, offering job to spouses can become a burden of the university in the future, for they are less likely to be important in the university.
What is more, there are more approaches to improve faculty members' morale. Making faculty happier can be achieved by many waya[?ways?]. If living there is various[句子有误，想表达什么？], morale will definitely be improved. For example, seminar can be conducted to improve both the relationship of faculty members and the morale, while making researchers' ideas contacted. Clubs for entertainment can be founded. Stadium can be built. Much can be done.
All in all, the money prepared for the spouses can be used in many different more effective, efficient, and economical ways[这几个adj有点纠结啊…] to gain the same goal. We should think twice before the money is spent [逗号？]whether the proposal, in the future, is a gift or merely a burden for the university.

1、两地所处地点可能有差异所以不能一概而论
2、安排配偶工作并不是唯一能吸引教师的因素，不如把钱花在其他地方
3、有更多的方式提高教职士气

这是我总结你全文的大概三点，感觉2、3里面有点乱，其中包含
1）
安排配偶工作不是吸引教师和研究者的唯一因素，教师往往更注重ABC等
2）
ABC等这些当中有些我们改变不了，所以我们为什么不把钱花在DEF等上面呢
3）
有更多提高教师士气的方式
4）
让教师更happy也有很多方法，比如OPQ等
在第3大点里，提高教师士气=让教师更happy？
感觉每个小点连接得不是那么好，有的可以分开说，有的可以捏合在一起。比如2可以把1）4）放在一起说安排配偶工作不是吸引教师和提高教师士气的唯一方式，教师更注重什么什么，这些会真正吸引和鼓励教师；3可以说题中提到“the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent”，用2）来说这些钱花在安排配偶工作上并不那么值得
个人建议，批判性接受吧~呵呵

fufan6711UID: 2788330

In this letter, the author suggests to offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member in order to attract the most gifted teachers and researchers to their faculty and improve the morale of their entire staff. Some studies conducted by Bronston College has been indicated to support the author's point of view. However, such studies made by a college could not be adquate for a decision of Pierce University which will definitely cost a lot of money. There are also many problems in the process of reasoning which make us not easily convinced by the author.
Firstly, the author indicates that some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. We should not easily moved by such studies made only by a college rather than authorized institutes. How many professors did they actually studied? And what kind of work did their spouses do in college? If the broadness of the studies can not be ensured, there could be other reasons for the professors' happy living rather than with their spouses in the same geographic area. If their spouses are professors rather than other work, the reason why professors are living together is because of their work rather than being attracted by such attemptation that they could work together in such small place. Even though professors like to live in small town with their spouses, the actual location of Pierce University is unavailable which may located in downtown rather than small places.
Secondly, the author try to convince us that the Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire in the interest of attrating the most gifted teachers and researchers to their faculty and imporving the morale of their entire staff. There is no information to prove that professors will be more likely to get to university because of their spouses' employment in the same place. And the new faculty member want to work in Pierce University just for their own reasons. Disturbing their private life by offering such employeement to their spouses will ruin the appearance of the university to some extent. And there is no evidence to show that the most gifted teachers and researchers show interest to universities which offer employment to their spouses. It will be more rediculous to relate the morale of the staff and employment of their spouses because there is no information provided for such effects. There is no details about the staff's spouses who are in bad employment of economic conditions. If there is absolutely no more need for their spouse' employment, how could such offer improve the morale of the entire staff?
Finally, the money invested in this effort will possibly wasted because there is no evidence provided to prove new professors will be more likely to accept their offers if their spouses have a chance of employment. And the employment situations of spouses of new professors are unavailable, we can not expect such action will lead to more employment in new professors because of the chances to their spouses.
There are many flaws in the author's reasoning process so that we can hardly conviced by such inadequate information. The studies should be made by authorized institutes to make sure the result well adapted. More work in new professors who want to work in Pierce University have to be made in order to sufficiently suppor the author's suggestion. There are obviously more reasons than the author expected in such issues which can make important effect while new professors are thinking about which university they will ultimately go.

annkeUID: 2605122

to soonyu
40min, 511words.
主要攻击点：
1  研究的范围不同，对象不明，不能说明问题。
2  没有考虑到P大学的实际情况以及教职工配偶们的态度。
3  实施此措施必将增加预算，应当权衡其利弊。
In this letter, the chairperson tries to persuade the president of Pierce University to make a decision that[这是decision的同位语从句，后面的句子应该是完整的，但这句后面缺少主语] offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member to improve[ing去] the morale of their entire staff and attracting more professors. To substantiate the benefit of the suggestion, the author cites some studies which reveal that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also working in the same geographic area. Reasonable as it seems, defects lie in that conclusion.
Firstly, the studies lack[vi] of adequate information. As we know, the studies are conducted by Bronston College, which is not located in the same town as Pierce University. Perhaps the economic conditions and environment of the town [where] Bronston College located are better than that of the town Pierce University located [in前面是that 介词不能省]. That is to say[这表示前后一个意思，但文章前后并不是一个意思], in those studies, professors are satisfied[satisfactory] probably because environmental reason rather than their spouses are also employed in the same areas. Moreover, there is not adequate information of these couples who both work in the same geographic area. For instance, older people may be more likely to accept the employment that they can work with their spouse together. Without enough information of people who participated in these studies, the conclusions of these studies are unsubstantiated.[攻击调查类错误]
Secondly, even it is really[real/ture be动词不能接adv] that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area, it may not match[不当] the condition of Pierce University. As we do not know the circumstance of this town,[少了东西，as we… we….因果复句，后面不能串到maybe去] maybe the pollution is serious, or the economic condition is poor, we have not confidence to persuade professors to accept the employment only because we offer to their spouses an employment. In another aspect, not every spouse of professor would like to be a teacher or researcher[这里是文中段子没有提到的，误读了]. Perhaps most spouses of faculty in Pierce have their own career so that the employment Pierce offering is not much attractive to them. To sum up, the assumption that offering employment to spouses of faculty can improve the morale or attract new professors is not substantiated.
Thirdly, even if this method is benefit[ial] to development of Pierce University, the author has not weighed the advantages and disadvantages[攻击优劣权衡，好！]. It is obvious that offering more employment will result in the increasing of budget. Without deep[ly] considering how much it would cost and how efficient it would be, we are not sure whether it is worth doing. In addition, spending more on increase wage of faculty or improving environment of campus may be more efficient to improve[ing去] morale of faculty and attract[ing去] professors[，]  but cost less than offering employment to spouses of faculty[这个句子太乱了，to do 和介词to分不清楚]. Without considering twice[?]， the president should not make any decision.
In summary, the suggestion is not justifiable. We cannot conclude that professors would like to work in Pierce University when their spouses are offered employments from the same university. Moreover, we cannot assert that offering employments to spouses of faculty is worth doing for Pierce University. Without doing more studies about that and considering the effort, the author cannot persuade me.
[个人建议，先大量输入看范文，在模仿改写，因为语法句法错误和词汇有限大大限制你的自由表达啊！很多地方文不达意，虽然我大概能明白你的意思，但是真的是不地道。
论证结构清晰，让步式攻击法也是我喜欢用的，不过要注意每一个论证要尽量展开，说清楚。]

5# soonyu

xiaohaixxxUID: 2317561

6# annke




TOPIC: ARGUMENT169 - The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.

"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."
WORDS: 296
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-5-13 21:30:49

This argument proposes that Pierce University should invest money on offering employment to the spouse of each new faculty member hired, by this means can the university attract the most gifted teachers and researchers as well as improve the morale of their entire staff, which seems plausible considering to the studies conducted by Bronston College. However, several sneakering logic flaws strongly weaken the proposal's reliability.（开头不错）
First of all, without providing relevant information---such as the sample numbers, and the sampling process---the studies conducted by Bronston College are unwarranted.（论证不充分） Moreover, the results of surveys do not necessarily lead to the conclusion that Bronston College has an excellent faculty, because the only fact, that professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area, is not sufficient to prove the conclusion. （论证需要具体的支持，要有原因，你这里感觉像提纲）In addition, the author do not identify that the small town Bronston College located belongs to the small towns professors prefer to live in. As there are many other small towns across the country, it is probably that professor would like to live in other small tows rather than the small town Bronston College (located in,)due to possible reasons that this town is noticeable(known) for unsafety and poverty. Hence, the author makes a false assumption that the studies conducted by Bronston College are believable and Bronston College has an advantage of preeminent faculty and professors prefer to live in the small town where the college locate.
Secondly,if all the assumption are temporarily regarded as true, another serious logical flaw is also unavoidable in the argument that there is no information demonstrating that Bronston College achieves an outstanding faculty due to adoption of the policy that investing money to attract professors' spouse to work in the town. Actually, this policy itself should be questioned. Common sense tells us most people choose a position in certain place result from factors like salary, promotion, and working environment. Therefore, whether professors would go a university predominately depend on whether the university could afford an compelling salary, whether the university own suitable equipment and staff for their academic research, rather than simply whether their spouses are offered jobs or not. Consequently, not only crucial information is absent in the argument, but also fallacious reasoning immerges.(这一段的论证你有点主观了)
Besides, even though we assume that Bronston benefit a lot from policy to provision jobs for professors' spouses,
the similarity between Bronston College and Pierce University, which both are located in a small town cannot necessarily effectiveness, totally cannot prove the similar benefits will occur in Pierce University. It is highly possible that there are a great many differences between Bronston University and Pierce University, for example, the latter is not as famous as the former, the working conditions in latter university is too poor to compare with the former. In these cases, even Pierce University copy the policy of Bronston University, the outcomes may turn out to be disappointment.
In a nut shell, this argument is not convincing to draw a conclusion that investment on offering employment to the spouse of each new faculty member hired can assist the university attract the most gifted teachers and researchers as well as improve the morale of their entire staff, neither does to
adopt the policy by Pierce University.
（觉得你这篇文章似乎写的很匆忙，条理不是特别清晰）