issue50, 求拍，留链必回拍~~

doraliuUID: 2842061

"In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculties should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach."

The statement is made under the conviction that by working outside the academic world all faculties will be able to improve the quality of instruction. But by saying “all”, the statement goes too far to be true.
There is no absolute answer of yes or no to whether faculties should work outside or not, it depends on the feature of the faculties’ research fields and should be decided by faculties as whether to work outside academic area or not.
The research of academic field could fill into two categories, application field and theoretical field. As to the first category, faculties should be encouraged to work outside the academic world. Theories in the books of application area tend to lag behind knowledge applied in working world, because before being written into a book, theories should be tested over and over in working world to make sure that they are right. So by working outside academic world, faculties in application area could be able to know the frontier of their research field. And also by solving the problems encountered when working outside the academic area, faculties come up with innovation of their research fields as the saying goes “real knowledge come form practice”. Moreover, by working outside, faculties could have an idea about the gap between the abilities of their students and the abilities the society needs, so as to give sound suggestions about students career enquiries.

However, to the second category, faculties should not be encouraged to work outside their academic area. The first reason to support my opinion is that it is hard to find a position that is suitable for theoretical researcher. And even assume that we can find one, it is difficult to decide whether such work is helpful to their research or instruction to their students. Take the research of math for example, what position the society can offer to a professor in math so as to help his research or help in teaching his students? Chengjinrun did not work outside academic world to find the solution of Goldbach Conjecture; Yuanlongping did not work outside academic world to become farther of hybrid rice. In these theoretical research areas, working outside academic world could make some faculties distracted from their research and their teaching instead of being helpful.

But as I wrote my essay, I carefully chose the word “encourage” to whether faculties should work outside academic area to help improve their instruction, for I firmly believe that faculties should have their choices of working outside or not staying inside. For qualified faculties in a university, they should know better than anyone else about their own style and what they need to improve to give good instructions. They should not be supposed to be a “shaped” teacher, shaped by commands from administrators. If all faculties are required to work outside academic area, the result would be miserable, for there is possibility that some faculties are just born a theoretical talent with no interesting in practical. So faculties in academic area should be not required to do something, they should be left with enough freedom for their research, for their style of teaching. Compulsory requires putting on them could only shadow their abilities to be good faculties.



To sum up, faculties in university could be categorized into two groups, application and theoretical. And though I concede that faculties in application field should be encourage to work outside academic world and faculties in theoretical area should not be encouraged to do so, it is never a good idea to force all faculties to do something. Faculties should have the freedom to make their own choices.

费话先生UID: 2788924

"In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculties should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach." The statement is made under the conviction that by working outside the academic world all faculties will be able to improve the quality of instruction. But by saying “all”, the statement goes too far to be true. There is no absolute answer of yes or no to whether faculties should work outside or not, it depends on the feature of the faculties’ research fields and should be decided by faculties as whether to work outside academic area or not. The research of academic field could fill (be classified)into two categories, application field and theoretical field. As to the first category, faculties should be encouraged to work outside the academic world. Theories in the books of application area tend to lag behind knowledge applied in working world,（practical world） because before being written into a book（before being published）, theories should be tested over and over (over and over again)in working world to make sure(ensure the validity of them，这样或许更简洁些) that they are right. So by working outside academic world, faculties in application area could be able to know the frontier of their research field. And also by solving the problems encountered when working outside the academic area, faculties come up with innovation of their research fields as the （a）saying goes “real knowledge come form practice”. Moreover, by working outside, faculties could have an idea about the gap between the abilities of their students and the abilities the society needs, so as to give sound suggestions about students career enquiries. However, to the second category, faculties should not be encouraged to work outside their academic area. The first reason to support my opinion is that it is hard to find a position that is suitable for theoretical researcher. And even assume that we can find one, it is difficult to decide whether such work is helpful to their research or instruction to their students. Take the research of math for example, what position the society can offer to a professor in math(去掉 a professor in math, 换成 a mathematician) so as to help his research or help in teaching his students? Chengjinrun did not work outside academic world to find the solution of Goldbach Conjecture(。。find the solution of goldbach conjecture without any work experience outside); Yuanlongping did not work outside academic world to become farther of hybrid rice. (neither did yuanlongping)In these theoretical research areas, working outside academic world could make some faculties distracted from their research and their teaching instead of being helpful. But as I wrote my essay, I carefully chose the word “encourage” to whether faculties should work outside academic area to help improve their instruction, for I firmly believe that faculties should have their choices of working outside or not staying inside. For qualified faculties in a university, they should know better than anyone else about their own style and what they need to improve to give good instructions. They should not be supposed to be a “shaped” teacher, shaped by commands from administrators. If all faculties are required to work outside academic area, the result would be miserable, for there is possibility that some faculties are just born a theoretical talent with no interesting in practical. So faculties in academic area should be not required to do something, they should be left with enough freedom for their research, for their style of teaching. Compulsory requires putting on them could only shadow their abilities to be good faculties. To sum up, faculties in university could be categorized into two groups, application and theoretical. And though I concede that faculties in application field should be encourage to work outside academic world and faculties in theoretical area should not be encouraged to do so, it is never a good idea to force all faculties to do something. Faculties should have the freedom to make their own choices.

我就直接讲问题啦，反正大家都是老朋友，不见外了：第一个我觉得既然你分了两类，就要清楚滴表面这两类各包括哪些，因为这两个词application theoretical 很抽象，读者不知道分类的标准，只能凭自己的主观印象，不够严谨。比如说袁隆平，农学领域吧，为什么归到theoretical,我本人就觉得他应该是另一类的。我建议是先说这两类有什么特征，譬如那个学科啊，属于这类，然后后面两段就着前面学科的特色进行论证。这样子，后面的论证，譬如不好找工作，对学科没帮助啊，就言之有据了。否则仅凭两个例子，是无法打动读者的。第二个，我觉得例子需要详细论述，例如陈景润的数学天赋啊在外面根本找不着工作啊，一个普通会计学生就好啦，而且他的。。猜想需要大量的时间，出去工作既不会有用到。。的机会，也浪费时间。。
之类的
  优点就是：我觉得结构相当清楚~而且观点很清晰，明白说什么。就是展开不充分。

doraliuUID: 2842061

2# 费话先生

谢谢谢谢！！！