【日记贴】aakpon一周战托福-作文求改

aakponUID: 2716906

今晚第一次写的，大概二十几分钟吧，请多指教！

research vs teach

As a tradition, especially in the big research universities, which accounts for the most of the famous universities, tenure is given by the faculty's academic record, and this is mostly taken credit by research publications. Both researching and teaching are quite time consuming, so here lies the intrinsic contradiction between these two. I would like to vote for teaching first. I think this is the basic function to be a teacher in a university.
The universities are the highest education institutions in our society. Most students come to universities for learning, thus if they cannot get a good study environment which largely depends on the teaching, they would probably consider transfering to another one. This will undermine the foundation of a university: they will lose students! Especially the good and ambitious students!
Furthur more, I think teaching will give an opportunity for professors to look at their research area from another spot. For most of them, what they are dealing with in research is very specific issues under some subject. I think sometimes they could get some fresh ideas while teaching, just like hard working workers need fresh air. Actually, this does work. As far as I know, many high-ranked economists would prefer teaching undergraduate, because from communicating with these amateurs(relatively speaking), they could get some views and ideas from a outside world, and sometimes it happens to be the remedy for their research.
More importantly, focusing on teaching is more socially beneficial. Research must be done by researchers, and researchers come from students. If the whole faculty do not pay much attention to teaching, and students don't get enough instructing, from a long-run view, the average level of researchers and their researches will decrease. It is a trade-off between 'consumption' today and 'consumption' tomorrow. If we consume a lot and leave little for saving, which means doing research dominates teaching, the 'consumption' in the future will be much less.
Certainly, we could not go to another extreme, say, paying a lot of attention to teaching. A balance between these two is very important. But as I stated at the beginning, granted that the heavy weight to research in universities these days, I think it is more important to ask for more attention for teaching.

aakponUID: 2716906

Political leader

With the development of human civilization, political leaders are playing a more and more important role in our society. I think a good communication skill is one of the key aspects of being a good political leader. It plays a fundamental role both in the electing part and the working part.

Firstly, with the widespread of democracy, only with a good communication could make one win the election. During the election, you need to communicate with the voters, and tell them your idea of running the community, either a city or a country. Only if one could make his words logically-organized, well-explained and convincing, he could get the votes. If he failed to do so, the voters would get confused about what he said, and hence relate his poor communication with his ability, which may end up with a failure in election.

Further more, as I stated at the beginning, a good communication skill also matters a lot in working. Within my knowledges, leaders are not technical workers like engineers or doctors, who need to fix some specific issues. Politicians are more exposed to more general questions, which could not be settled within one man's power. This requires a basic role, which is know as coordinator, in the whole mechanism. I think political leaders are often dealing with coordination things, because as far as the organization is big enough, what largely influences the whole efficiency is not efficiency per person any more, but the low operation cost between different persons and apartments. A political leader should be skilled enough in communication to lower any potential scratches and fictions, and hence lubricate the whole 'machine'.

In addition, mental condition are another key issue among both government officers and common people. A good mood and optimism always make us work better. I think this is quite self-evident, since most of us have experienced situations where we get a lot of help and comfort after talking with our parents, teachers or leaders. A good communication skill will equip the political leader a powerful weapon against enemies. We all remember the famous speech of Churchill during the World War II, and how he encouraged the British people to fight the Nazi. At the moments of disasters or wars, these good communications would always provide people faith, and hence the strength to overcome anything.

In sum, both from pre and post sides, a good communication is a fundamental element in the life of a political leader. And taking a good advantage of this, will have a significant positive externality for its political entity.