Argument3[AWER_5]

houyanchunUID: 2432949

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."

In this argument, the author recommends that in order to attract more students to work in large, corporate firm of Megalopolis(M), these firms need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work. To support his claim, the author offers some evidence. These evidence seems reasonable at first sight, however, there are some crucial flaws exist in them.
First of all, the evidence that the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years while an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small could lend credence to the author's recommendation. The author fails to provide relative evidence to demonstrate the status on employers of those large firms. If the employers in large firms are sufficient to meet the need of development of the corporate, it is certainly that the graduates could not get opportunities to work in large firms. So it is no wonder that the number of law school graduates who went to work for large declined.
Secondly, the survey and sample for the survey should be statistically reliable. However, the author could not provide evidence to explain how many participators have been surveyed and what is the number of them have given the answers to the survey. Without above evidence, it deserves to doubt that only a few part graduates are surveyed so that their responses are not sufficient to present other graduates situation. Furthermore, the responders in the survey are first-year students rather than graduates. Therefore, it is entire possible that the conditions and situations would be different from now when these first-year students face to choose jobs. According above discussion, the survey is incredible.
Thirdly, the author also could not provide evidence to validate the effect of his recommendations. In above evidence, the author has points out the reason of graduates choosing small firm is basing on the satisfaction which they have attain. For that matter, even if those large firms have offered more benefits and incentives, and reduce the number of hours for graduates, the graduates would not like to work for them. It is very possible that in order to get satisfaction from work, graduates are prefer to work longer rather than shorted number of hours.
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands.In order to convince us to accept the recommendation, the author should provide more evidences that the state of employment in large firms of M, and the sampling is sufficient to representative of the overall graduates’ situation. It would be further improved by pointing out the recommendation could be effective just like the author has anticipated.

[ 本帖最后由 houyanchun 于 2008-1-17 12:15 编辑 ]

yubeckhamUID: 2331621

Argument3 [AWER_5]

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."In this argument, the author recommends that in order to attract more students to work in large, corporate firm of Megalopolis (M), these firms need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work. To support his claim, the author offers some evidence. These evidence seems(seem) reasonable at first sight, however, there are some crucial flaws exist in them.First of all, the evidence that the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years while an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small could lend credence to the author's recommendation. The author fails to provide relative evidence to demonstrate the status on employers of those large firms. If the employers in large firms are sufficient to meet the need of development of the corporate, it is certainly that the graduates could not get opportunities to work in large firms.(表达感觉有问题，没表达出你想表达的意思这句话) So it is no wonder that the number of law school graduates who went to work for large declined.

Secondly, thesurvey and sample for（of）the survey should be statistically reliable. However, the author could not provide any evidence to explain how many participators have been surveyed and what is the number of them (how many ) have given the answers to the survey. Without above evidence, it deserves to doubt that only a few part graduates are surveyed so that their responses are not sufficient to present other graduates situation. Furthermore, the responders in the survey are first-year students rather than graduates. Therefore, it is entire possible that the conditions and situations would be different from now when these first-year students face to choose jobs. According above discussion (According to the discussion which we talk about above), the survey is incredible. Thirdly, the author also could not provide evidence to validate the effect of his recommendations. In above evidence, the author has points out the reason of graduates choosing small firm is basing on the satisfaction which they have attain. For that matter, even if those large firms have offered more benefits and incentives, and reduce the number of hours for graduates, the graduates would not like to work for them(别那么肯定不会啊，应该may not). It is very possible that in order to get satisfaction from work, graduates are prefer to work longer rather than shorted number of hours.(我觉得这里应该说短的工作时间不一定带来满足感，还有许多其他因素，例如工作环境，竞争压力，待遇等等，你这样说好象有点牵强，自问谁喜欢多加班少拿钱的，呵呵)
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. In order to convince us to accept the recommendation, the author should provide more evidences that the state of employment in large firms of M, and the sampling is sufficient to representative of the overall graduates’ situation. It would be further improved by pointing out the recommendation could be effective just like the author has anticipated.

结构和语言都不错，就是还有一点小问题注意下就好了，感谢分享
第一段和最后一段的写法多看看范文喔，用点漂亮的句行，不要老用IN ORDER TO啦，呵呵