0910G[North America Flying]Issue50 by fake

fake2009UID: 2631119

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."

The speaker asserts that the connection between academic world and professions would benefit the quality of instruction. Generally, I agree with the speaker on a basis of pragmatism. However, I hold a different view on the goal of instruction and approaches different faculty should take.

Based on college and university level, the purpose of instruction is to develop students’ academic thinking method which can be applied to every conceivable aspect of life, not necessarily only confined to professions. If not, there’s no need to distinguish technical school from universities. Admittedly, college level education is also a process during which the students will prepare themselves to enter the society. However, the crucial different between a technical school and a university is that different emphasis would be put on the academic and critical thinking. In this sense, to my knowledge, the college faculty is doing great, neglecting the teaching method they adopted.

When entering the college, according to our interest, we should firstly choose the major which means the later study will mostly focus on the specific area. As we know, there are possibly two categories of subjects, pure theoretical courses like philosophy, history, literature, physics; and practical courses, like education, business, management, computer science. The former concentrates on figuring out and explaining the reasons of some natural phenomenon to reassure the world, while the latter one is to solve practical problems to better our lives.

Due to different original intentions, faculty of different categories should adopt different approaches when teaching their followers. Especially to those from practical courses, it’s of great significance that the faculties touch upon the real world to acquire the most demanded abilities the relevant profession requires. Then to keep pace with the development and update in time to help the students better understand the course and future professions.

The fact is that there exists certain gaps between majors be learned and future professions, for instance, companies prefer employees with working experience, rather the diploma or certificate the candidates hold. It is also true that a lot of publications were much later than the real subject put into wide use. The well-known windows operation system is an epoch making achievement in the real world of demand and supply, rather in the college programming class. However, the publications of the research of computer operation system—the windows series—was much latter than the craze of using the windows.

Anyway, to those pure theoretical followers, the major mission is to acquire fundamental expertise of their specialty. After all, it’s hard to directly connect such subjects as philosophy and history with certain professions. In this sense, the proposal in this argument is not perfectly available.

What’s more, there are far more other factors could also influence the quality of instruction besides its contents, like teaching process, the processing of learning feedback, time and energy still be put on education. Comparing a more passive participation in class, classes with active interactions might much easier to reach teaching proficiency. On the other hand, the faculty should find a balance in contribute time and energy between information acquisition from outside of academic world and the teaching process. As long as the distribution of time and energy is reasonable and approachable, the quality of instruction could be assured.

In sum, not all faculty, regardless of different categories, should exert efforts in working with relevant professions outside academic world. It is the faculty who are responsible for the practical classes that urgently need close contact with the future jobs in order to meet the employers’ anticipations. Besides perfect its contents, we can also improve the quality of instruction by elevate the effectiveness of teaching, and appropriate distribution of time and energy.

haunteagleUID: 2609432

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."
The speaker asserts that the connection between academic world and professions would benefit the quality of instruction. Generally, I agree with the speaker on a basis of pragmatism. However, I hold a different view on the goal of instruction and approaches different faculty should take.

Based on college and university level, the purpose of instruction is to develop students’ academic thinking method which can be applied to every conceivable aspect of life, not necessarily only confined to professions. If not, there’s no need to distinguish technical school from universities. Admittedly, college level education is also a process during which the students will prepare themselves to enter the society. However, the crucial different between a technical school and a university is that different emphasis would be put on the academic and critical thinking. In this sense, to my knowledge, the college faculty is doing great, neglecting the teaching method they adopted.

When entering the college, according to our interest, we should firstly choose the major which means the later study will mostly focus on the specific area. As we know, there are possibly two categories of subjects, pure theoretical courses like philosophy, history, literature, physics; and practical courses, like education, business, management, computer science. The former concentrates on figuring out and explaining the reasons of some natural phenomenon to reassure the world, while the latter one is to solve practical problems to better our lives.

Due to different original intentions, faculty of different categories should adopt different approaches when teaching (irrigating) their followers. Especially to those from practical courses, it’s of great significance that the faculties touch upon the real world to acquire the most demanded abilities the relevant profession requires. Then to keep pace with the development and update in time to help the students better understand the course and future professions.

The fact is that there exists certain gaps between majors be learned and future professions, for instance, companies prefer employees with working experience, rather the diploma or certificate the candidates hold. It is also true that a lot of publications were much later than the real subject put into wide use. The well-known windows operation system is an epoch making achievement in the real world of demand and supply, rather in the college programming class. However, the publications of the research of computer operation system—the windows series—was much latter than the craze of using the windows.

Anyway, to those pure theoretical followers, the major mission is to acquire fundamental expertise of their specialty. After all, it’s hard to directly connect such subjects as philosophy and history with certain professions. In this sense, the proposal in this argument is not perfectly available.

What’s more, there are far more other factors could also influence the quality of instruction besides its contents, like teaching process, the processing of learning feedback, time and energy still be put on education. Comparing a more passive participation in class, classes with active interactions might much easier to reach teaching proficiency. On the other hand, the faculty should find a balance in contribute time and energy between information acquisition from outside of academic world and the teaching process. As long as the distribution of time and energy is reasonable and approachable, the quality of instruction could be assured.

In sum, not all faculty, regardless of different categories, should exert efforts in working with relevant professions outside academic world. It is the faculty who are responsible for the practical classes that urgently need close contact with the future jobs in order to meet the employers’ anticipations. Besides perfect its contents, we can also improve the quality of instruction by elevate the effectiveness of teaching, and appropriate distribution of time and energy.

还是我改你的……有点理解为啥你不想改我的了，读起来头大

1.
开头，入题
2.
中间大段是支持，也就是说应该出外工作以获得实际经验
3.
后面是反对，认为还有其它方法

最大问题是中间三段的分类论述上

文章应该只有一个主线，我感觉文章有两个主线“能力—学历”“哲学—科学”，这让我读起来比较怪异。主线应该更加明确一点，如果是按照学科分类，实用性的需要而思维型的不需要，如果是按照重要性，有些能力重要有些学历重要。反正不能一文看见多种区分

总的来说这篇文章读起来还是有味道的，不过中间的写作太过中国化，应该稍微地也贴近GRE一点