Argument3【0806G-Sunbird小组】第六次作业

Bellona0428UID: 2418798

TOPIC: ARGUMENT3 - The following appeared in a newspaper article about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.

"In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually offer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely because they experience greater job satisfaction at smaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, most agreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to them than job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms of Megalopolis will need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work."
WORDS: 440         TIME: long        DATE: 2007-11-28

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. The author makes a comparison of large, corporate firms, which has a decreasing number of law school graduates took jobs, with small, general pracitce firms, increasing that number. The author cites that law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely pursuing a greater job satisfaction than higher salaries. And a survey of first-year students also showed that point. Careful scrutiny of each of these evidences, however, reveals that none of them lends to a logical reason.

To begin with, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms in Megalopolis has declined by 15 percent over the last three years does not necessarily indicate that these graduates who are not willing to pursue a job in large firms. It is entirely possible that Megalopolis' large firms have not enough position to contain more people, so the graduates had to choose some small, general practice firms. It is also possible that other regions' large, corporate firms offer relatively higher salaries and more challenge work, so that more graduates chose work in other regions. In word, without ruling out the overall condition where are the graduates working and where are they willing to go, the author can not convince me that more graduates are willing to choose to work for the smaller firms.

Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that if the graduates work for large, corporate firms, they will experience less job satisfaction compared to work at the smaller firms. Perhaps, compared with the smaller ones, graduates draw more attention on the higher reputation and stranger teamwork when they choose the firms. Or perhaps, as a leading law school graduate, they are willing to challenge more so harsh work that they can experience more job satisfaction. In addition, the large corporation has rather gradually routines and stranger economics, so people worked in there have more benefits and incentives and more proper work hours.

Finally, the survey is incredible when it comes to the quantity of graduates and whether the first-year students are representative of the overall graduates. Perhaps, when finished their school work, the graduates desire for a job at the large firms than they are a newer student.

In conclusion, the author fails to validate the suggestion that the large, corporate should offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work. To solidify the suggestion, the author should provide a further information about whether the smaller firms offer more benefits and incentives and less work hours for their employees. In a word, the argument is logically unacceptable.

toumingsenlinUID: 2344846

TOPIC: ARGUMENT3 - The following appeared in a newspaper article about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.

"In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually offer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely because they experience greater job satisfaction at smaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, most agreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to them than job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms of Megalopolis will need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work."
WORDS: 440         TIME: long        DATE: 2007-11-28

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. The author makes a comparison of large, corporate firms, which has a decreasing number of law school graduates took jobs, with small, general pracitce firms, increasing that number. The author cites that law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely pursuing a greater job satisfaction than higher salaries. And a survey of first-year students also showed that point. Careful scrutiny of each of these evidences, however, reveals that none of them lends to a logical reason.

To begin with, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms in Megalopolis has declined by 15 percent over the last three years does not necessarily indicate that these graduates who are not willing to pursue a job in large firms. It is entirely possible that Megalopolis' large firms have not enough position to contain more people (have not enough open positions), so the graduates had to choose some small, general practice firms. It is also possible that other regions' large, corporate firms offer relatively higher salaries and more challenge work, so that more graduates chose work in other regions (prefer working there). In a word, without ruling out the overall condition where are the graduates working and where are they willing to go, the author can not convince me that more graduates are willing to choose to work for the smaller firms.

Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that if the graduates work for large, corporate firms, they will experience less job satisfaction compared to work (comparing working) at the smaller firms. Perhaps, compared with the smaller ones, graduates draw more attention on the higher reputation and stranger (stronger) teamwork when they choose the firms. Or perhaps, as a leading law school graduate, they are willing to challenge more so harsh work that they can experience more job satisfaction. In addition, the large corporation has rather gradually (reasonable) routines and stranger economics(competitive benefit & compensation system公司里面的薪资福利系统好像是这样说的), so people worked in there have more benefits and incentives and more proper work hours.

Finally, the survey is incredible when it comes to the quantity of graduates and whether the first-year students are representative of the overall graduates. Perhaps, when finished their school work, the graduates desire for a job at the large firms than they are a newer student.( The closer to graduation, the stronger desire for working in large firms 似乎更简洁一些，你觉得呢？)

In conclusion, the author fails to validate the suggestion that the large, corporate should offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work. To solidify the suggestion, the author should provide a further (further) information about whether the smaller firms offer more benefits and incentives and less work hours for their employees. In a word, the argument is logically unacceptable.

[ 本帖最后由 toumingsenlin 于 2007-11-30 22:41 编辑 ]

toumingsenlinUID: 2344846

没有找到强夫的作业，所以就改您的了，有不同意见可以再沟通哦！

lewis0409220UID: 2238498

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. The author makes a comparison of large, corporate firms, which has a decreasing number of law school graduates took jobs, with small, general pracitce firms, increasing that number. The author cites that law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely pursuing (a) greater job satisfaction than higher salaries. And a survey of first-year students also showed that point. Careful scrutiny of each of these evidences, however, reveals that none of them lends to a logical reason.

To begin with, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms in Megalopolis has declined by 15 percent over the last three years does not necessarily indicate that these graduates who are not willing to pursue a job(jobs) in large firms. It is entirely possible that Megalopolis' large firms have not enough position to contain more people, so the graduates had to choose some small, general practice firms. It is also possible that other regions' large, corporate firms offer relatively higher salaries and more challenge work, so that more graduates chose work in other regions. In (a) word, without ruling out the overall condition where are the graduates working and where are they willing to go, the author can not convince me that more graduates are willing to choose to work for the smaller firms.

Moreover, the author unfairly assumes that if the graduates work for large, corporate firms, they will experience less job satisfaction compared to work at the smaller firms. Perhaps, compared with the smaller ones, graduates draw more attention on the higher reputation and stranger teamwork when they choose the firms. Or perhaps, as a leading law school graduate, they are willing to challenge more so harsh work that they can experience more job satisfaction. In addition, the large corporation has rather gradually routines and stranger economics, so people worked in there have more benefits and incentives and more proper work hours.(这一段没看懂)

Finally, the survey is incredible when it comes to the quantity of graduates and whether the first-year students are representative of the overall graduates. Perhaps, when finished their school work, the graduates desire for a job(jobs) at the large firms than they are (a) newer student(students).

In conclusion, the author fails to validate the suggestion that the large, corporate should offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work. To solidify the suggestion, the author should provide a further information about whether the smaller firms offer more benefits and incentives and less work hours for their employees. In a word, the argument is logically unacceptable.

攻击点很多. 语言也很丰富. 第三段没看明白.

[ 本帖最后由 lewis0409220 于 2007-12-2 11:45 编辑 ]