Argument3【0806G-Sunbird小组】第六次作业

hope~~UID: 2416007

Argument3【0806G-Sunbird小组】第六次作业
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."
word:468      

In this article the author point out that the law school gradates preferred choosing to work the small firms, despite large firms usually provide much higher salaries, therefore, in order to reverse this situation, these large firms must offer more benefits and incentives to new law school gradates, while requiring them to work less hours. To support this recommendation the article relies on employment trend of large firms in the Megalopolis during the last three years, along with a survey of first year students at a leading law school. Careful examination of this supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the author’s recommendation.

Even though the number of law school graduates who went to work for large ,corporate firms declined by 15 percent does not necessarily indicate that the gradates would like not to choose the large firms. Perhaps gradates have difficult in passing interview, that is to say, the admission standard of the large firms may be raised. Because the large firms have more sophisticated works, higher salaries, more heated completion, just a little gradates may be admitted into the large firms. Since the article fails to account for this alternate explanation for the 15 % decline, the author cannot lend this evidence support to the recommendation base on the declined.

The author also cites a survey that first year students at a leading law school more trend for jobs satisfactions than high salaries, but the first year students cannot equated with four year gradates. There are many obviously difference between the first year students and gradates, such as not full professional knowledge, not mature thinking of problems, not facing to living pressure, the important point is that they cannot face how to choose the job at present. Moreover, the leading school students’ choosing is not on behaves of most schools in Megalopolis.

Finally, the argument is not clearly show what jobs satisfaction should include, whether it only include more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they work. It is entirely possible that there are many other aspects, such as higher salaries, more development chance, and greater work environment. If so, just several aspects rose is not appeal more students. Further more, the small firms have many advantages that is simple work environment and exchange ideas between boss and employee is lack of large firms.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it be must provide cleaner evidence that (1) the number of gradates work in the large firms is declined without other reasons, (2) condition of the large firms required gradates (3) gradates of seeking jobs should be researched. To better assess the argument I would need to know a survey showing what’s jobs gradates of seeking jobs want to find.

[ 本帖最后由 hope~~ 于 2007-12-2 00:54 编辑 ]

liouvilleUID: 2412940

In this article the author points out that the more law school graduates preferred choosing to work for the small firms, despite large firms usually provide much higher salaries, therefore, in order to reverse this situation, these large firms must offer more benefits and incentives to new law school gradates, while requiring them to work less hours.(this sentence seems too long, I suggest that you can simplify the conclusion.) To support this recommendation the article relies on employment trend of large firms in the Megalopolis during the last three years, along with a survey of first year students at a leading law school. Careful examination of this supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the author’s recommendation.Even though the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent (you should mark off here or you have grammar error), it does not necessarily indicate that the graduates would like not to choose the large firms. Perhaps graduates have difficulties in passing interview, that is to say, the admission standard of the large firms may be raised. Because the large firms have more sophisticated works, higher salaries, more heated completion (I think you want to say “fierce competition”), just a little (few) graduates may be admitted into the large firms. Since the article fails to account for this alternate (alternative) explanation for the 15 % decline, the author cannot lend this evidence support to the recommendation base(basing) on the declined.The author also cites a survey that first year students at a leading law school more trendtend for jobs satisfactions than high salaries, but the first year students cannot be equated with four year gradates (graduate is enough, the “four year” is redundant ). There are many obviously differences between the first year students and graduates, such as not full professional knowledge, not mature thinking of problems, not facing to living pressure (you need to add the subject of the sentence because you did not indicate it before), the important point is that they cannot face (not accurate) how to choose the job at present. Moreover, the leading school students’ choosing is not on behaves of(on behalf of) most schools in Megalopolis.Finally, the argument is(does) not clearly show what jobs satisfaction should include, whether it only include more benefits and incentives and reduce(reduction of ) the number of hours they work. It is entirely possible that there are many other aspects, such as higher salaries, more development chance, and greater work environment. If so, just several aspects rose is not appeal(can not attract) more students. Furthermore, the small firms have many advantages, that is simple work environment and easily exchanged ideas between boss and employees, which is lackedof(in) large firms.In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it be must provide cleaner(clearer) evidence that (1) the number of graduates working in the large firms is declined without other reasons, (2) admission condition of the large firms required for graduates (3) graduates of seeking jobs should be researched. To better assess the argument I would need to know a survey showing what the jobs satisfaction graduates want to find is.


文章的分析不错。
只是在用词和语法上还是有不少的问题。用词不准，语法也有些错误，不知道是不是时间比较匆忙造成的。
Graduate 全部写成了 gradate.