argument140 最后四天,恳请指教

TidusnakeUID: 2281340

题目：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."
字数：513          用时：00:30:00          日期：2007-7-26 16:49:43

In this argument, the author claims that Professor Thomas should receive a $10000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson; however, the evidence such as the largest classes, the research grants and the like which the author provide is not well reasoned.

To begin with, the fact that her classes are among the largest at the university does not necessarily mean that she is popular among students. Simply put, if Professor Thomas is charity to her students and thus always gives a relatively high scores to the students. Then students choose her classes just for high scores. Even she is popular among students, this fact still supports little to that she have a high teaching abilities which the author tries to imply.

Further, another flaw with the argument is that the author unfairly assumes that  the fact Professor Thomas brought to university in research grants exceeded her salary in each has anything to do with her research ability. As a matter of fact, when it comes to research ability, what we really need to know is the production of the research. Consider, if she brings so much grants but still failed to be successful in the result, then her research ability is open to doubt. Also, what we further have to know is what role does she plays among the research. Only if she plays a comparatively crucial role in it, can we accept her research ability. Moreover, 2 years is a relatively short time comparing 13 years. In brief, without more specific information about Professor Thomas's performance in the research, we can not weigh it as evidence to support the author's recommendation.

What is more, even assuming that Professor Thomas has high teaching and research abilities, it does not mean she will be competent in the position of Department Chairperson. In point of fact, there are a myriad of dissimilarities between these two positions. For instance, if she becomes a Department Chairperson, undoubtedly, she has to deal with a lot of trivial things which she did not have to do when she was a professor. As a result, presumably, she is unable to cope with them and also it influences her daily teaching and research work. Then the university will lost an excellent professor yet gain a terrible chairperson.

Finally, as the author claims, if we do not promote and raise Professor Thomas's salary, she will leave Elm City University for another college. Unfortunately, the author provides no evident to verify this assumption. It is equally possible that she is satisfied with the present job and present salary. Without asking her authentic will, any decisions are not reasonable to make. After all, a good professor, in most cases, care much about the laboratory situation and academic ambience of an university rather than cares so much about the position and salary.

To sum up, the argument is not cogent as it stands. Prior to any decisions are made, the author should provide more specific evidence and forceful reasons to verify that we should raise Professor Thomas's salary and give her a promotion.

zhangyouj02UID: 2289316

LZ太强了,很好的文章！
加油！！！！

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

看下来差不多可以了, 最后在熟悉下题目保持模考就行了, 现在改也不会对你有太大帮助
加油

TidusnakeUID: 2281340

谢谢斑斑～:)