argument140 (米国有米）bailamo27第四次作业３

bailamo27UID: 2191717

(2006-12-04)
Argument140. The following appeared in a report of the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University.
"During her seventeen years as a professor of botany, Professor Thomas has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students. Moreover, the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. Therefore, in consideration of Professor Thomas' demonstrated teaching and research abilities, we recommend that she receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; without such a raise and promotion, we fear that Professor Thomas will leave Elm City University for another college."
(在Thomas教授作为植物学教授的17年里，她证明了自己确实是值50000元年薪的。她的班级是本校最大的班级之一，这说明她在学生中间的受欢迎度。而且，她给学校带来的研究捐助在过去两年中都超过了她的年薪。因此，鉴于Thomas教授已被证实的教学和研究能力，我们建议将她的年薪增加10000元，并提升为系主任；如果没有这些加薪和提升，我们担心Thomas教授将会离开Elm City大学到别的学校就职。)

Syllabus:
1.无证据显示Thomas要去别的学校。即使要去，仅仅加薪和提升为系主任就一定能留住吗？学校名声、实验条件、教学环境等。
2。对于她值得拿50000元年薪的论据有很多缺陷：
（1）她的课堂最大，与其受欢迎程度无绝对关联。很可能她的课是必修课。
（2）在近2年里她给学校带来的资金超过其工资，不意味今后也能带来这么多资金。况且，未调查其花在科研及教学的经费是否已超过其带给学校的科研经费呢？再则，一个好的教授不是看其能给学校带来多少研究捐助，而更多的是看其科研成就对整个社会有多大价值。
3. 以上论据倘若都成立，也不能证明一个好的具有教学能力的教授能够担任与教学完全不同的行政职务。系主任琐事多，需要统筹和领导协调能力。她不一定行。
总结，片面，无强说服力，需提供更多依据。

Full text: (535 words,   Time: 9:22----10:50 花了好长时间哦，不断有人打扰，真是不能安心啊！）
In this argument, the arguer states that Elm City University should reward Professor Thoma $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, in order to prevent she from leaving for another college. However, careful scrutiny, the arguer fails to give convincing evidence to demonstrate his argument is right.

To begin with, there's no any evidence showes that Professor Thomas will change her workplace. So there's no need to worry about a storm will come without any sign of it. Even, Professor Thomas may shift to another university, it's no absolute relationship to keep her stay by raising salary and providing a promotion. Because to be a real researcher, pursue of fame and fortune will not be put in the first place. Money can't solve everything. Say, if Elm city universtiy fails to provide her a better research condition and improve teaching inviroment, she will entirely possible to leave. Meanwhile, a high reputation of an university will provide teachers more chances to further study and enhance self-ability. The arguer doesn't mention how the repute of Elm city university is, so maybe it's an university with good repute which will keep Thomas to stay, even without giving a raise in salary and a promotion.

Additionally, the arguer asserts that Professor Thomas is well worth her annual salary of $50,000. However, there are several flaws in the argument which can't support it.   Firstly, it's said that professor Thomas' popularity is high for her classes are one of the biggest in school. Logically thinking, there's no direct connection between one's popularity and the size of classes. It's likely becasue Thomas's class is a compulory subject which it's obvious to become the biggest class among university. Secondly, the money of research grants she has brought to school is more than her own salay in recent 2 years. But who knows this sound situation will last in the following years? There's no sign to show she'll bring such numerous money continually. Furthermore, there's no investigation on the money she spends on her research is in the range of the the grants she brought in. Additionally, it's not to assess whether a professor is good or not by how much research grants he brought to school, but rather by judging how great the value of his research to the society. All above can't fully prove that Thomas capable enough and is fit for her annual salary.

The last but the most important, a qualified professor with great teaching ability will not surely to charge with adimistration position which is totally different with teaching. It's necessary for a chairman of a department to possese overall consideration, leading and cooperation ability. Meanwhile, besides various trifles to handle, can a professor still be concentrate in his study field?  To professor Thomas, these all should be called for question and estimation.

In summary, despite the suppose that professor Thomas will leave for another university, to prove that she deserves $10,000 raise in salary and promotion of Department chairperson, the arguer has to provide persuasive evidence, such as, the ability of teaching, administration control and research potential. Finally, a decision whether she deserves good payment and promotion could be made after an all-round assessiment of Thomas's ability.

chronicleUID: 2254484

In this argument, the arguer states that Elm City University should reward Professor Thoma $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, in order to prevent she from leaving for another college. However, careful scrutiny (太中文化了，没有表达清楚, 建议改成careful scrutiny reveals that) the arguer fails to give convincing evidence to demonstrate his argument is right.

To begin with, there's no any evidence showes (to indicate)that Professor Thomas will change her workplace. So there's no need to worry about (that) a storm will come without any sign of it. Even (if), Professor Thomas may shift to another university, it's no absolute relationship (谁和谁的关系?建议改一下：the arguer cannot ensuer that it is absolutely effective) to keep her stay by raising salary and providing a promotion. Because to be a real (不恰当, outstanding) researcher, pursue (persuing) of fame and fortune will not be put in the first place. Money can't solve everything. Say (建议用书面语), if Elm city universtiy fails to provide her a better research condition and (to) improve teaching inviroment, she will entirely (be)possible to leave. Meanwhile, a high reputation of an university will provide teachers more chances to further study and enhance self-ability. The arguer doesn't mention how the repute of Elm city university is, so maybe it's an university with good repute which will keep Thomas to stay, even without giving a raise in salary and a promotion.

Additionally, the arguer asserts that Professor Thomas is well worth (worthy) her annual salary of $50,000. However, there are several flaws in the argument which can't support it.   Firstly, it's said that professor Thomas' popularity is high for her classes are one of the biggest in school. (不通啊) Logically thinking, there's no direct connection (relationship) between one's popularity and the size of classes. It's likely becasue Thomas's class is a compulory subject which it's obvious to become the biggest class among university. Secondly, the money of research grants she has brought to school is more than her own salay in recent 2 years. But who knows this sound situation will last in the following years? (太口语化了) There's no sign to show (that) she'll bring such numerous money continually. Furthermore, there's no investigation on the money she spends on her research is in the range of the the grants she brought in. Additionally, it's not to assess (去掉) whether a professor is good or not (should not be estimated) by how much research grants he brought to school, but rather by judging how great the value of his research to the society. All above can't fully prove that Thomas (is) capable enough and is fit for her annual salary.

The last but the most important, a qualified professor with great teaching ability will not surely to charge with (hold) adimistration position (successfully) which is totally different with teaching. It's necessary for a chairman of a department to possese overall consideration, leading and cooperation ability. Meanwhile, besides various trifles to handle, can a professor still be concentrate in his study field?  To professor Thomas, these all should be called for question and estimation.
这一段应结尾说出Thomas可能根本不具备管理能力。

In summary, despite the suppose that professor Thomas will leave for another university, to prove that she deserves $10,000 raise in salary and promotion of Department chairperson, the arguer has to provide persuasive evidence, such as, the ability of teaching, administration control and research potential. Finally, a decision whether she deserves good payment and promotion could be made after an all-round assessiment of Thomas's ability.

不知是否是精力分散的原因，本文出现的问题比较多。首先，文中多次出现it's,can't，建议不要省略；其次，疑问句过多出现会影响分析的可信度以及逻辑性；第三，文中出现了比较多的语法错误，希望注意，这会很影响印象分的。
建议先在word中查一下拼写及语法错误，否则修改时会很吃力。还要多看些范文，学习一些比较好的表达方式。


[ 本帖最后由 chronicle 于 2006-12-11 12:43 编辑 ]