〓DIES IN FLAMS〓 Issue50 By tracywlz

tracywlzUID: 2522388

仍在自我批判中~
TOPIC: ISSUE50 - "In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach."

In my view, although the speaker puts forward an absorbing argument, I still have some opposite perspectives against it. As the speaker said, all faculty should be required to work outside campus in order to improve teaching quality. However, the speaker unfairly ignores plenty of bad effects brought from this act.

We are in a world with a gradually serious limitation of teaching resources. The proportion between teacher and student is extraordinary lower in many universities than an integrate education system needs. That means numerous universities students are not being offered enough education directions from teachers-the number of existing experienced professors cannot match with the dramatically increasing universities students, thus how can we let the insufficient teaching resources flow to other fields? Even it may give rise to bring some useful knowledge back to university, but as for an essential class profession, does the practical experiences matter more than the need of subject knowledge from the students? As for this point, it is unwise for universities to let all teachers go out of campus especially for those are in the role of essential subjects teaching.

Meanwhile, as for teacher themselves, teaching an exceeding number of students seems an onerous task for them in contemporary life. Can they sustain a healthy fit if still have duties outside? The speaker may reply that teachers can shorten or quit their teaching missions for a while and devoted themselves in the changeable out-academic world. Notwithstanding, let us came back to the first point, if existing teaching resources are being cut down, the university are facing a dilemma, to cut down the courses or increase the rest teachers' burden. Either of the choice will result in a decline of university education quantity.

Moreover, let us focus on the benefactor as the speaker implies, compared with the lost from teacher's drain out, the advantage from teacher going out are smaller which can be paid from other ways like reading professional magazine, communicating with students from other universities and so forth. In addition, for the society, notwithstanding it is undoubtedly that more learned suggestions could give a more professional perspective for industry, however, dogmatism threaten can not be forgotten. If the manage are more willing rely on the "academic experts" and totally ignore workers or other practical employees, the result may not be perfection as the formula works out-everything was proved to be fail at last which are separate itself from pragmatism.

Admittedly, we cannot totally negative the speaker's suggestion. Many value cannot be replaced which are the results of teacher's practical experience outside. Nevertheless as for some basic classes these knowledge are not as vital as a-well-prepared and detail teaching. Therefore, what the speaker argue that it is indispensable for the entire faculty to work out is not reasonable.


In a word, as many questionably effects existing, the speaker’s suggestion of letting all the teachers go out of campus seems unseemliness. In essence, dissimilar measures ought to be taken to two kinds of subject teaching. As for practical subjects, it is sensible to let teacher find out-campus work, and for those are devoted in basic courses teaching, experiences in campus are enough for them.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Issue50 June. 30 修改版

50"In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach." In my view, the speaker puts forward an absorbing suggestion, while it is not wise after carefully thinking about the possibility consequences it may bring to. The actuality education system does not have the ability to let all teachers go out and for students, teachers, colleges, or societies, the new measures still can results in some unreasonable results. We are in a world with a gradually serious limitation of teaching resources. The proportion between teacher and student is extraordinary lower in many universities than an integrate education system requires. That means numerous universities students are not being offered enough education directions from their teachers. A phenomenon is exist in numerous colleges and universities: a normal undergraduate has to share all his professional courses with above 119 classmates and a graduate together with 19 colleagues has only one mentor to help their studies. As the progress of colleges and universities extension project, an increasing number of youth get the chance of further study, while in fact; it becomes more and more likely a method to obtain degree certification rather than gain knowledge--when the colleges and universities offer unceasingly enlarged capacity classroom to them, how can their have the same teaching resources as their predecessors had? As for this point, it is unwise for universities to let all teachers go out of campus. Meanwhile, as for teacher themselves, teaching an exceeding number of students seems an onerous task for them in contemporary life. Can they sustain a healthy fit if still have duties outside? The speaker may reply that teachers can shorten or quit their teaching missions for a while and devoted themselves in the changeable out-academic world. Notwithstanding, let us focus on the first analysis, if existing teaching resources are being cut down, the university are facing a dilemma, to cut down the courses or increase the rest teachers' burden? Either of the choice will result in a decline of university education quality. Moreover, let us focus on the benefactor as the speaker implies. For colleges and universities, compared with the lost comes from teacher's drain out, the benefits from having more experienced teachers to boost their qualified teachers standard can be replaced by other ways like promoting technical proseminar or fortifying communication between professions and students. For societies, granted that it is undoubtedly more faculty going out means more professional perspectives flowing to industry, however, it is not an easy task to let all the technical theory operate well in practical production. Moreover, all faculty working outside means an decreasing number of working chances for worker or other non-professional interviewees. The economic crisis have brought an unprecedented number of unemployment to society, it would be worse if all universities and colleges faculty rushing out to compete a society working position. Admittedly, the speaker’s suggestion cannot be totally denied. The experience from outside campus is indispensible for education, and the ultimate purpose of scientific research is contributing to practical work. Howbeit, we can enlarge the teachers amount of universities and colleges as well as let a few faculty go out for expanding their knowledge in practical fields and transfer the other faculty when the experienced one come back campus. It is a large program but benefits not only to students and teachers but also to campus and societies. In sum, it is not wise to let all faculty go out while the teaching resources can be ameliorate by increasing fluidness between campus and society.

tracywlzUID: 2522388

谢谢2楼指正。
1.试问关于我这篇像A的根据是什么？告诉我，我马上改。
2.第2段我是想写因为现在的教师还不足，所以让所有的教师都working outside是不明智的选择。
3.这段我是针对In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level的。所以应该没有偏题。
4.本来我这篇就不是中立的。我是大多数否定。但是不排除例外。所以应该是否定为主。

这是我小小的申辩。有什么不对的，直接提出来即可。2楼的我没看到你的文章。链接出来都是占楼的说~

corpuscleUID: 2503411

In my view, although the speaker puts forward an absorbing argument, I still have some opposite perspectives against it. As the speaker said, all faculty should be required to work outside campus in order to improve teaching quality. However, the speaker unfairly ignores plenty of bad effects brought from this act.重复

We are in a world with a gradually serious limitation of teaching resources. （教育资源有限）The proportion between teacher and student is extraordinary lower in many universities than an integrate education system needs. That means numerous universities students are not being offered enough education directions from teachers-the number of existing experienced professors cannot match with the dramatically increasing universities students, thus how can we let the insufficient teaching resources flow to other fields? 师生比例不足，有经验的老师少之又少，所以是制约教育发展的一个原因，你的观点是让所有的老师获取外界经验不现实。但这个写作方向有点问题，不是因为缺少经验制约教育发展就不应该鼓励教师获取外界经验，相反，正是因为这个因素制约教育发展，所以更要提倡教师学习外界经验。你应该这么说：制约教育界发展的主要矛盾是师生比例不足，而不是外界知识的短缺，盲目追求外界知识既增加老师负担，也不能解决主要矛盾。Even it may give rise to bring some useful knowledge back to university, but as for an essential class profession, does the practical experiences matter more than the need of subject knowledge from the students? 老师可以既讲解知识，又传授经验嘛，既联系实际，又形象生动。As for this point, it is unwise for universities to let all teachers go out of campus especially for those are in the role of essential subjects teaching.你的突破点是教育资源的问题，如何绕到题目的本质---老师应该学习外界知识值得你好好考虑，就找准这个方向，慢慢深入写下去。

Meanwhile, as for teacher themselves, teaching an exceeding number of students seems an onerous task for them in contemporary life（增大负担）. Can they sustain a healthy fit if still have duties outside? The speaker may reply that teachers can shorten or quit their teaching missions for a while and devoted themselves in the changeable out-academic world. Notwithstanding, let us came back to the first point, if existing teaching resources are being cut down, the university are facing a dilemma, to cut down the courses or increase the rest teachers' burden. Either of the choice will result in a decline of university education quantity（quality）.
这段批驳的还是很有道理的，要么增大老师的负担，要么就使有限的教育资源更加短缺。

Moreover, let us focus on the benefactor as the speaker implies作者暗示什么？这里有必要说出来, compared with the lost from teacher's drain out, the advantage什么优点？ from teacher going out are smaller which can be paid from other ways like reading professional magazine, communicating with students from other universities and so forth其实，这些都不能让教师获得实际经验，既有悖常识，又缺少论证和说服力. In addition, for the society, notwithstanding it is undoubtedly that more learned suggestions could give a more professional perspective for industry, however, dogmatism实际经验和教条主义的关系有必要阐明下
threaten can not be forgotten. If the manage are more willing rely on the "academic experts" and totally ignore workers or other practical employees, the result may not be perfection as the formula works out-everything was proved to be fail at last which are separate itself from pragmatism没看太懂.我觉得这一段有些多余，写的也不好，既然第一段只写一些缺陷，就不要再提优点（至少不要用整段去说优点），文章就找出这个观点的全部缺陷。

Admittedly, we cannot totally negative the speaker's suggestion. 这一段针对上面两个缺陷提出具体的建议，文章的高度就上去了。其实建议就一个，扩大老师的队伍，然后让一部分人去学习外界经验再把外界经验带回校园，再去说明外界知识对教育的帮助，全文就连贯一致了。Many value什么价值？没去说 cannot be replaced which are the results of teacher's practical experience outside. Nevertheless as for some basic classes these knowledge are not as vital as a-well-prepared and detail teaching理由？哪些基础学科？. Therefore, what the speaker argue that it is indispensable for the entire faculty to work out is not reasonable.看到这里，原来你的主题是大贬，那开头的态度词就不能这么用吧？这个观点看起来似乎正确，其实是站不住脚的。坚决的反对观点，那个absorbing 、still太客气了。


In a word, as many questionably effects existing, the speaker’s suggestion of letting all the teachers go out of campus seems unseemliness. In essence, dissimilar measures ought to be taken to two kinds of subject teaching. As for practical subjects, it is sensible to let teacher find out-campus work, and for those are devoted in basic courses teaching, experiences in campus are enough for them正文没有从两种不同学科去论证，不能在结论上提及.

1.文章的主线要更明确
2.论证要深入，不能一笔带过，该深入的地方还是要深入的
3.好像缺少例证，不过这个题目素材不好找，我AW考的就是这个题
4.首尾和正文要一致

很久没改作文了，有点手生，外加喝的有点晕，改的不一定正确，批判性接受吧~~！

tracywlzUID: 2522388

先谢谢。
体会
1.existing experienced
professors太烂了。我提出这个experienced 就是让别人批判的~作者的观点就是缺少有经验的老师因此需要到外面工作。
2.我应该阐明
an essential class profession。的定义。
3.如果使用了作者认为，作者暗示之类。最好将其说清楚具体是什么。
4.reading professional magazine, communicating with students from other universities and so forth其实，这些都不能让教师获得实际经验，既有悖常识，又缺少论证和说服力.这里如果我改成 improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level也许会好点~
5.If the manage are more willing rely on the "academic experts" and totally ignore workers or other practical employees, the result may not be perfection as the formula works out-everything was proved to be fail at last which are separate itself from pragmatism 这段我是想说即使老师出去了。对于社会。也未必会有作者想象得那么好。
6.嗯那个诚然段改成建议段会好点~
写文章的时候刚开始没打算分开写基础学科和实践学科的。但后来发现如果不分开写。那个教师的实践对某些方面作用不大不好写。于是临时加上了。再仔细看看，其实完全可以不提这方面的。直接从1）资源有限。2）增加负担。3）其他措施与建议来improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level。
谢谢咖啡了~呵呵。

corpuscleUID: 2503411

呵呵，不客气
我觉得应该把文章的逻辑主线弄清楚，各段连接紧密，一步步直逼主题，各段不要写的那么散
前两段写缺点，第三段就提出针对前两段的具体措施，这样整个文章就是一个有机的整体，文章的意义也就自然出现了。
正文的态度要跟你的主题保持一致，如果是偏向于否定，文章要肯定的地方尽量少些，简单带过就好，没必要用一整段去写，显得重心失衡
还有就是你的结尾段，结尾是用来总结正文的，正文没提到分学科，结尾不能突然冒出这么一个观点

tracywlzUID: 2522388

那个。改死我了。咋就自己这么菜讷 ？

corpuscleUID: 2503411

一段段来说吧！
1.语法问题，该用形容词修饰名词的，你却用名词。
2.还可以再扩展下，先写本身的教育队伍就少，然后说随着不断的扩招，教育队伍更显得不足。而且这个教育资源不仅局限于教师，还有教学资源
3.PASS
4.这些负面效果跟你的主题有多大关系？文章主要是就教育质量而谈的，你用这么长一段写其他负面效果有些凑字数之嫌，应该三言两语就打发了
5.这一段的分论点要改一改，先承认外界经验对教育质量的帮助，然后笔锋转变一下，当前制约教育发展的主要矛盾是师资力量不足，教育资源有限，需要把这些问题解决后，再来提升教师的外界经验。

tracywlzUID: 2522388

.那个possible有些老抽了
2.如果说到教学资源，那么与faculty无关，是否会算偏题？
4.这段我打算从作者的出发点，也就是目的分析。
5.我感觉你提的很对。但是我又想表明自己的all的问题很大~
但是仔细想想。前面没指出all的问题，这里再说，就有点偏题。还是说时机未到比较好~恩嗯。

辛苦了。

corpuscleUID: 2503411

2.对，教学资源那里不能扩展，可以在后面解决教学主要矛盾提一提
4.前面已经用两大段说了负面效果，这里就没必要用那么多笔墨写与教学质量无关的负面效果了，泛泛而谈三言两语打发就足够了
5.这一段可以好好扩展，文章的点睛之笔就在这一段，写文章不是为了分析问题，而是针对问题提出具体的建议的

tracywlzUID: 2522388

了解。谢谢了哈、