- 最后登录
- 2011-2-17
- 在线时间
- 23 小时
- 寄托币
- 89
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2010-6-9
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 0
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 63
- UID
- 2830569

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 89
- 注册时间
- 2010-6-9
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 0
|
本帖最后由 章小杰 于 2010-7-29 03:32 编辑
暂定8月底 9月初 北美杀G。 具体时间依准备AW进度而定。 计划8月一整个月准备作文。
现在的 进度是对A有了一些思路。 正在研读北美范文,准备模板。
对ISSUE不知所云。
今天完成了第二篇ARGUEMENT习作。贴在此处,欢迎拍砖。
各位希望加入作文互改小组的 童鞋请在此跟帖。
本人邮箱 zhangxiaojie0313@hotmail.com
Argument 3
The following appeared in a newspaperarticle about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.
"In Megalopolis, the number oflaw school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15percent over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduatestook jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usuallyoffer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for thesmaller firms most likely because they experience greater job satisfaction atsmaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, mostagreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to themthan job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms ofMegalopolis will need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives andreduce the number of hours they must work."
The author of this article unfairly assume a causal relationship between the fact that the number of law school graduates who seeks employment in large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last threeyear with job preferences obtained from a recent problematic survey among first-year law school students, and, therefore, unreasonably suggest that large, corporate firms should offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work in order to attract potential employees.
The cited survey in this arguments problematic in the sense that it only covers first-year students at one particular leading law school, which do not represent the entire population. It is entirely possible that students of this particular school bear more sense of social responsibility and lean more towards job satisfaction when seeking for a job than the average law school students. It is also likely that students in this leading law school get more financial aids, such as fellowships and scholarships, from government and alumni, which leave them less financial pressure after gradation than students from other law schools, therefore, leave them more freedom to choose a position with lower salary and less benefits, but more job satisfaction.
Also, first-year students in leading law school’s preferences have little indication of the vocational preference of law school graduates. Many years have to be passed before the survey attendees become job candidates. Their job preference can be greatly altered due to their experiences during these school years or economic conditions at that time. The author of this article needs careful consideration about this fact before drawing any conclusion based on this survey.
Moreover, the assumption that the15 percent declining in the number of law school graduates in large corporate firms is caused by students’ preference towards greater job satisfaction offered by small companies is highly suspicious. First, no evidence is provided showing that small companies offer greater job satisfaction than large firms.It is more likely that small firms face more competition pressure in order to survive, which is also transferred to their employees. Serving at small firms may end up to be lower salary, less benefits, higher pressure and not necessary greater job satisfaction. The decrease in the number of law school graduates in Megaloplis seeking position in large firm may simply due to the migration of large firms out of the town in the past three years, while most law students prefer to work in Megaloplis.
Finally, the conclusion of this article does not follow as no creditable evidences are provided bolstering that offering more benefits and reducing working hours could alter graduates’ choices of employment towards large, corporate firms. Benefits and working hours may be completely irrelevant to graduates’ choice if new law school graduates are not attracted by monetary rewards.
Overall, this argument is unpersuasive as it stands. A creditable study of the cause of decreasing number of law school graduates seeking for position in large firms concerning the position availability in large firms in Megalopolis, new law school graduates‘ vocational preference, economic conditions and so on is needed before any conclusions drawn. |
|