Agument140 Hamming小组第7周作业 试验了一下心得开头结尾

liquidshileUID: 2254332

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."

翻译：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。
*********************************************************
Outline
1.      The assumption that the popularity of Thomas' classes is attributable to her effectiveness as a teacher overlooks other possible reasons for the popularity of these classes.
2.      The mere fact that the amount of granted money Thomas attracted to the University last year exceeded her salary proves nothing about either her teaching abilities or her research abilities.
3.      The author fails to substantiate that Thomas has ability to be a chairperson.
4.      The report provides no evidence whatsoever regarding the likelihood that Thomas would leave the University if she is not granted the proposed raise and promotion.

**********************************************************
提纲：
1.班级大小与受欢迎度没有直接联系，更不能说明她的科研能力
2.她带给学校的钱不能说明她个人的研究教学能力
3.没有证据表明Thomas能胜任chairperson的工作
4.没有迹象表明Thomas会离开Elm University
**********************************************************

无计时，计时版近期放出  WORDS：423

This argument is not cogent because it assumes that the stated correlation implies causal relation, and the author hasty concludes that Professor Thomas would leave Elm City University for another college, which is not necessarily the case.   

To begin with, the fact that Thomas’s classes are among the largest does not indicate the popularity of Thomas among students. Maybe the popularity comes from the lessons themselves. Perhaps Elm City University is famous for its botany discipline. It is natural that the botany classes become popular among students. Or perhaps her curricula are basic course in some departments, so every student in these departments must be present in the classes. Consequently, without a wide investigation among students in her classes about the real reason why they attend her curricula, the author cannot convince us that Professor Thomas is popular.  

The mere fact that Thomas brought more than $100000 to the university in last two years proves nothing about either her teaching or her research ability. Perhaps the amount of money, compare with the number of money brought by other teachers, is very smaller. Or perhaps before the last two years Thomas brings nothing or less money for the research grants and Elm City University suffers a great deal of losses.

Even if we concede that Thomas has ability of research and teaching, however, there is no evidence that she has ability to be the Department Chairperson. As an administrator, management and organization are more useful than research and teaching ability. It is entirely possible that Thomas is a good teacher but not a good manager.

Finally, the author provides no evidence that Professor Thomas would leave Elm City University if she is not granted the proposed salary raise and promotion. However, it is equally possible that she never thinks about leaving. Perhaps she prefers the academic environment and the reputation of Elm City University to money and promotion. Even if Thomas needs better condition, we should to know whether a $10000 raise and promoting to chairperson are enough for her. Maybe she wants $20000, or she wants to be a vice president of this university. Since the author fails to consider Thomas’s own ideas, the conclusion the author makes is unsubstantiated.


Overall, the argument, while it seems logical at first glance, has several flaws as discussed above. To strengthen it the author should provides clear evidence about Thomas’s ability of teaching and research. To better evaluate the argument we need to know the real fact of Professor Thomas’s own ideas about raise and promotion.



[ 本帖最后由 liquidshile 于 2007-1-3 15:21 编辑 ]

ScorpionSkyUID: 2273954

呵呵，你还有几个版本啊,放个修改版就不错了!

开头有点短~:victory:

sisong2003UID: 2154005

Agument140 Hamming小组第7周作业 试验了一下心得开头结尾

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."

翻译：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。*********************************************************Outline1.      The assumption that the popularity of Thomas' classes is attributable to her effectiveness as a teacher overlooks other possible reasons for the popularity of these classes.2.      The mere fact that the amount of granted money Thomas attracted to the University last year exceeded her salary proves nothing about either her teaching abilities or her research abilities.3.      The author fails to substantiate that Thomas has ability to be a chairperson.4.      The report provides no evidence whatsoever regarding the likelihood that Thomas would leave the University if she is not granted the proposed raise and promotion.
**********************************************************
提纲：
1.班级大小与受欢迎度没有直接联系，更不能说明她的科研能力
2.她带给学校的钱不能说明她个人的研究教学能力
3.没有证据表明Thomas能胜任chairperson的工作
4.没有迹象表明Thomas会离开Elm University
**********************************************************

无计时，计时版近期放出  WORDS：423

This argument is not cogent because it assumes that the stated correlation implies causal relation, and the author hastily concludes that Professor Thomas would leave Elm City University for another college, which is not necessarily the case.   

To begin with, the fact that Thomas’s classes are among the largest does not indicate the popularity of Thomas among students. Maybe the popularity comes from the lessons themselves. Perhaps Elm City University is famous for its botany discipline. It is natural that the botany classes become popular among students. Or perhaps her curricula are basic course（可能required course更有说服力） in some departments, so every student in these departments must be present in the classes. Consequently, without a wide investigation among students in her classes about the real reason why they attend her curricula, the author cannot convince us that Professor Thomas is popular.  

The mere fact that Thomas brought more than $100000 to the university in last two years proves nothing about either her teaching or her research ability. Perhaps the amount of money, compare with the number of money brought by other teachers, is very smaller. Or perhaps before the last two years Thomas brings nothing or less money for the research grants and Elm City University suffers a great deal of losses.

Even if we concede that Thomas has ability of research and teaching, however, there is no evidence that she has ability to be the Department Chairperson. As an administrator, management and organization are more useful than research and teaching ability. It is entirely possible that Thomas is a good teacher but not a good manager.

Finally, the author provides no evidence that Professor Thomas would leave Elm City University if she is not granted the proposed salary raise and promotion. However, it is equally possible that she never thinks about leaving. Perhaps she prefers the academic environment and the reputation of Elm City University to money and promotion. Even if Thomas needs better condition, we should to know whether a $10000 raise and promoting to chairperson are enough for her. Maybe she wants $20000, or she wants to be a vice president of this university. Even though we provide a $10000 raise and promoting to chairperson, she may still leave. Since the author fails to consider Thomas’s own ideas, the conclusion the author makes is unsubstantiated. 从反面考虑很不错，个人觉得加一句效果更好

Overall, the argument, while it seems logical at first glance, has several flaws as discussed above. To strengthen it the author should provides clear evidence about Thomas’s ability of teaching and research. To better evaluate the argument we need to know the real fact of Professor Thomas’s own ideas about raise and promotion.

总的来说结构经典，攻击全面，不失独特的地方，加油！

liquidshileUID: 2254332

谢谢修改！