Argument238----多谢指教~！

neverjustUID: 2848024

TOPIC: ARGUMENT238 - The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Mira Vista College to the college's board of trustees.

"At nearby Green Mountain College, which has more business courses and more job counselors than does Mira Vista College, 90 percent of last year's graduating seniors had job offers from prospective employers. But at Mira Vista College last year, only 70 percent of the seniors who informed the placement office that they would be seeking employment had found full-time jobs within three months after graduation, and only half of these graduates were employed in their major field of study. To help Mira Vista's graduates find employment, we must offer more courses in business and computer technology and hire additional job counselors to help students with their resumés and interviewing skills."
WORDS: 528
DATE: 2010-7-16 18:58:59



In this argument, through a comparison about employment situation with Green Mountain College (GMC),the president of Mira Vista College (MVC) concluded that for helping graduates recieve job offers, college have to supply more courses in business and computer technology and hire more job counselors to help students find jobs. But the conclusion was based on some unfairly analyses.

To begin with, the author ignored the differences between MVC and GMC. Maybe GMC is a more famous college with mountains of outstanding graduates, and for that reason, they are more likely to be hired by companies. And MVC is a relatively common college, so its students were a little hard to find jobs. Except that, it's possible that GMC is a college focus on business and business graduates are easier to get job offers for the demand of business talented is bigger while MVC's major of advantage is something that a little harder to find jobs, like philosophy. Yet the author overlooked the difference which may play an important role on employment.

Even if the two colleges are neck to neck, and there are more graduates have got jobs in GMC, It doesn't mean that was contributed by more courses and helps from job counselors. The author fails to considered many alternative explanations. Perhaps GMC graduates are popular among prospective employers due to their superior communication, coordination and other potential capacities developed in the comprehensive education in college, or GMC have provided more chances to their students for practicing at actual workplace. Maybe GMC has done more effect on propagating their students to the public. And in such all-round instruction and nurturing, more courses and the additional job counselors just displayed least function. In addition, maybe GMC's students required less for treatment. So the president of MVC should take account more other possibilities.

Last but not the least. The data provided by the author is incredible vague. We don't know what kind of jobs those 90 present graduates from GMC get. The fraction of students who got full-time jobs was not showed either. And how many of them were employed in their field of study? Without this information, we could not evaluate whether the employment situation of GMC is better than MVC. What's more, there are only 70 percent of MVC seniors informed their work seeking situation. The rest students may all have got satisfied jobs already. Besides, the president has not offered how many students graduated from these two colleges individually. It's possible that the quantity of GMC's graduates were much less than MVC's, so though the fraction of who have got jobs from GMC is bigger than that in MVC, but it doesn't mean MVC's students needs more help on hunting jobs. So, maybe the employment of MVC is better than GMC's.

In sum, this argument suffered from several flaws. To strengthen it, the author should provide more information of the two colleges. And consider the real reasons that played important roles on helping GMC’s students got jobs. In addition, the author should also count all the job graduates got of 2 colleges. After analyze all these things, make a wise decision to help students on employment then.

=======

我现在纠结于“两校差别”和“多余课程和就业指导不一定对GMC的就业率有多少帮助”两点的论据上……
因为……有很多能想到的合理他因，几乎都可以安到这两个中的任一个上。比如“GMC更注重对学生的全面培养”。“Gmc的知名度比较广泛学生素质比较高”等等论据……也许应该把他们合并？对GMC就业情况发挥作用的合理他因之一就是两校差距？
还请高人多加指点~谢谢！

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

zhanwei~~

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

其实我可以看出来你前两段的内容写得有点交叉 并且有点混乱。。应该说整体看上去，你的思路是非常详尽的，缺点就是缺乏一个统一的逻辑，或者是批驳的顺序。让人看了感觉是攻击得不像是一点一点进攻，而像是机关枪打到那里算那里。

第一点是写得最混乱得一点，首先TS就很模糊，完全没起到告诉别人你到底想说什么。然后仔细看了2遍，和下一段，我觉得你这两段基本上讲得是一个问题。就是 这两校就业率即使有差别，也不一定是因为business course 和 就业指导员 引起的。 在这个基础上提供别的，让A校的人找工作更容易的原因。

然后我能猜到你想攻击，打算攻击，但是没有写好的一点。就是A校成功的经验，不一定就能应用在B校上即使他们确实是因为offer 商科才成功的。这一点可能跟前面那点很容易写成一样。但是如果你想把这一点单独列出来，也不是不可能达到的。但是你肯定就要小心不能跟前面重复。比如前面从学生个人能力的角度讲，这里就从两个学校本质的区别来讲。比如B校是理工学校，学生都是来这里学理工的，没有很多business的课程的原因就是因为学生本身不感兴趣，没几个人报考，你开了有何用？etc。不如用别的方法。。。

最后一点写得不错。批判得比较到位。但是也有一种散弹枪的感觉。看到百分比，先攻击最明显的人数基础问题。然后把70%和90%那句结合起来，一点一点的批判。得给人一种清晰明确得说理顺序。。总之现在的状况让人看着有点头昏。。

neverjustUID: 2848024

3# lingli_xiaoai

谢谢小哀姐姐的帮助
我会继续改进的！