Argument140[Aero_9]

houyanchunUID: 2432949

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."

In this argument, the author recommends that in order to make Professor Thomas(T) continual teaching in Elm City University(E), the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries(C) should recommend T $10000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. To support his recommendation, the author has cited evidence that the classes of Professor T and the money she has brought to the university in research. These evidence seem reasonable at first sight, however, there are many fallacies in them.
First of all, the evidence that her seventeen years as a professor of botany lends little credible to the recommendation. The evidence only explain that she has enough ability to learn by herself, does not mean her is also good at instructing students. Without relative evidence to explain this point, we could not be convinced to believe that she is a competent professor with higher ability.

Secondly, the evidence that her classes are among the largest at the university also could not support the author's recommendation. The author fails to explain what kind of the class is. If the class is compulsory, it is no wonder why the participated students are so large. Or the mark of the class is easy to get and so many students have taken the class, rather than the class is popular. From this point, the evidence could not validate the professor T is a excellent instruction.

Thirdly, the evidence that the money she has brought to the university in research grants could not validate her research ability. It is well known, there are different between the research and exertion. If the grant are designed only for achieving certain function by using mature technology, the professor’s researchful ability of exploring unknown field could be validate. And the recommendation is without persuasion. And the author fails to provide evidence to demonstrate the instructed and researchful ability of the professor so that we could not accept the recommendation.

In sun, the argument is poor credible. In order to improve the argument, the author should provide compelling evidence to validate the professor has outstand capacity in teaching and researching. Furthermore, the author should provide relative evidence to explain the professor is popular in students.