Argument140【0710G Victors互助小组】第4次作文 by mmbee

mmbeeUID: 2316818

TOPIC: 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."

1.       demonstrated teaching abilities
unconvincing evidence: Her classes are among the largest at the university, demonstrating her popularity among students.
2.       research abilities
unconvincing evidence: the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years.
3.       Even if Professor Thomas indeed possess such demonstrated teaching and research abilities as the argument stated, it is hard to say whether a promotion to Department Chairperson is a wise strategy for the Elm City University as well as Professor Thomas herself.
4.       The arguer fails to tell us the cause or causes why Professor Thomas is planning to leave Elm City University and choose another college. Therefore, even if the University virtually provides Professor Thomas with such a raise and promotion, it is entirely possible that she still will leave Elm City University for another college when the university offers such conditions.  

WORDS: 671          TIME: 0:30:00(+15mins,下次争取按时！)         DATE: 2007-5-25

In this argument the arguer concludes that in order to prevent Professor Thomas from leaving the Elm City University for another college, the university will give her a $ 10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. To support his conclusion, the arguer cites some evidence to prove the Professor Thomas's demonstrated teaching and research abilities. However, the argument suffers from several flaws, discussed as following.

In the first place, by stating Professor Thomas's classes are among the largest at the university, the arguer attempts to demonstrate her popularity among students. Such mere evidence, however, does not necessarily convince us of the professor's teaching abilities. On the contrary, the arguer fails to provide any evidence to prove this crucial point. It is completely possible that the classes the professor offers are compulsory for all the students in the university, taking elementary computer science courses for an instance; or it happens that there are no enough professors in the university who could provide those courses in a certain specialization to meet the increasing needs and interests of students. In a word, before drawing the final conclusion, we need more detailed information to be convinced of the professor’s teaching abilities.

In the second place, by claiming the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years, the arguer trys to convince us of the professor's outstanding research abilities. However, it is not necessarily this case. Perhaps the local education department is placing more emphasis on this research field in which Professor Thomas works so that it input more research grants than has ever been before; or perhaps the research funding has come from such industries or business sectors as medicine, agriculture or any one that has to rely on relevant research results to develop its business. Without ruling out the possible scenarios, the arguer's statement about the professor's research abilities is unconvincing.

In the third place, even if Professor Thomas indeed possesses the demonstrated teaching and research abilities, it is hard to say that a raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson are a wise strategy for the university as well as the professor herself. First, the arguer does not provide any information concerning the financial conditions of the university. Secondly, the abilities demonstrated during the teaching and research work does not prove the professor also has excellent abilities, such as leadership, management, and the like, when playing a role as a department chairperson in the university. Thus before it takes any action concerning the raise or promotion, it is necessary for the university to make a deeper analysis of the all-round working abilities of the professor.

Finally, the arguer fails to tell us the real reason or reasons why the professor plans to leave the university and chooses another college. If the financial and position issue is the key, the problem may be solved by the solution the arguer claims. Otherwise, it will not. The fact might be that the professor chooses to change her job place due to the natural factor-the climates at another college location accommodates her much better than that at the current university; or her family will have more convenience if she switches her job to work in that college; or she really dislike the working conditions, personnel relationship or typical culture of the Elm City University. Unless the arguer precludes the potential factors, therefore, even if the University virtually provides Professor Thomas with such a raise and promotion, it is entirely possible that she will still leave Elm City University for another college.  

In sum, the argument is unpersuasive in the above aspects of reasoning. To make it more convincing, the arguer need provide more detailed information to prove the teaching and research abilities of Professor Thomas. In order to better evaluate the argument, we also need to know why the professor plans to move her job to another college. The more detailed information the arguer provides, the more accurate analysis we can make.


[ 本帖最后由 mmbee 于 2007-5-27 10:32 编辑 ]