请大家帮着改改issue第十篇issue50

xingzheliUID: 179907

写了这么多，总是不见长进！
（word坏了，没法写完纠错，可能有错字）
上次帮我提建议的jimboy，你的作文刚搜到，正在看。。。

------题目------
In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.
------正文------
According to the speaker, all faculty in the colleges or unversities should be asked to spend time working out side. Although I admit that pratical experience may be important for the teachers in some certain areas to improve their instructions, it seems to be unnecessary for all the faculty to do so, since these experience cannot be obtained in all areas, and sometimes, the requirement may be even harmful to the instruction.

At first glance it might be tempting to agree with the speaker's assertion on the basis that after all quiet a few subjects are built on the foundation of experience from work outside the academic world. Without practical experience, these academic world would collapse. As a result, for the academic theories, they could not develop any longer; for the students received the instruction, they would find that it is difficult for them to use their knowledge into the careers after graduate, since it has already outdated. For the surpportive instance, one need see no more than the area of administration. All the theories come from the working experience. The core of these theories is about how to cope with the problems the students may face in the real work. Obviously, no one can image these problems without working outside the academic world.

Aside from such areas, however, I fundamentally disagree with the speaker's claim. For one thing, for some subjects, like philosophy, literature, theorical physics, finding the relevant professions outside the academic world is almost impossible. If the academic world of these areas would stop developing but for the precatical experience form outside, the Aristotle's classic theories would not appare; Newton could not discover laws about classic physics; Farady could never have chance to discover electromagnetic induction; Einstein would also fail to tell us anything about theories of relativity. In short, the development of these areas doesn't rely on the experience from outside, but the activities in the cells of brilliant brains.

For another thing, if we require all faculty spend time on working outside, it is very likely to distract them from the formal class and their experients. Everyone's energy and time is not unlimited, and this is nowhere more true than for the experts in the university and college, since they have to spend most time on preparing for the classes, giving the lectures, and making experients. Additional tasks will surely make them pay even less attention on the instruction, therefore in this respect working outside can only damage the quality of instruction at the college and university level, rather than improve it.

In sum, despite the fact that practical experience can benefit those subjects which have relativele closer relationship with the professions, the statement is fundamentally incorrect. I would concede that the teachers in the colleges and unversities should not be required to work outside unless it is very necessary.

鬼谷子UID: 159645

请楼主注意发贴格式，请看我的签名档

xingzheliUID: 179907

最初由 鬼谷子 发布
[B]请楼主注意发贴格式，请看我的签名档 [/B]

好的,多谢提醒!已经改过来了

poohUID: 146994

------题目------
In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.
------正文------
According to the speaker, all faculty in the colleges or unversities should be asked to spend time working out side. Although I admit that pratical experience may be important for the teachers in some certain areas to improve their instructions, it seems to be unnecessary for all the faculty to do so, since these experience cannot be obtained in all areas, and sometimes, the requirement may be even harmful to the instruction.

At first glance it might be tempting to agree with the speaker's assertion on the basis that after all quiet a few subjects are built on the foundation of experience from work outside the academic world. Without practical experience, these academic world would collapse. As a result, for the academic theories, they could not develop any longer; for the students received the instruction, they would find that it is difficult for them to use their knowledge into the careers after graduate, since it has already outdated. For the surpportive instance, one need see no more than the area of administration.  是不是management要好一些，administration是一门学科吗 All the theories come from the working experience. The core of these theories is about how to cope with the problems the students may face in the real work. Obviously, no one can image these problems without working outside the academic world.

Aside from such areas, however, I fundamentally disagree with the speaker's claim. For one thing, for some subjects, like philosophy, literature, theorical physics, finding the relevant professions outside the academic world is almost impossible. If the academic world of these areas would stop developing but for the precatical precatical???  but for 的意思是若不是，你给我翻译一下你写的这句，看着不通顺 experience form outside, the Aristotle's classic theories would not appare ; Newton could not discover laws about classic physics; Farady could never have chance to discover electromagnetic induction; Einstein would also fail to tell us anything about theories of relativity. In short, the development of these areas doesn't rely on the experience from outside, but the activities in the cells of brilliant brains.

For another thing, if we require all faculty spend time on working outside, it is very likely to distract them from the formal class and their experients. Everyone's energy and time is not unlimited, and this is nowhere more true than for the experts in the university and college, since they have to spend most time on preparing for the classes, giving the lectures, and making experients. Additional tasks will surely make them pay even less attention on the instruction, therefore in this respect working outside can only damage the quality of instruction at the college and university level, rather than improve it.

In sum, despite the fact that practical experience can benefit those subjects which have relativele closer relationship with the professions, the statement is fundamentally incorrect. I would concede that the teachers in the colleges and unversities should not be required to work outside unless it is very necessary

写得不错，语言基础很好，句型变化多，文章逻辑比较清晰。这篇题目简单，可以写点复杂些的题目，锻炼逻辑思维能力。

xingzheliUID: 179907

谢谢pooh姐姐, 我把管理学的名字弄错了. 那句话我的意思是"如果说没有实际经验很多领域就会停止发展,那么Aristotle就不能....."l