【kaleidoscope】小组第一次作业 Argument3 by Azoi

azoiUID: 2636348

3 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."


F1. 刚毕业的学生应该是因为竞争激烈、工作经验不足才去小公司的，并非是因为小公司工作满意度高（因果）
F2. 问卷对象是大一学生，对自己的职业规划和行业认识都不深入，缺乏参考价值（调查）
F3. 大公司需要优秀的人才，而不是靠提高员工福利来吸引刚毕业的大学生（方法）

Text

The article suggests that the local law school graduates in Megalopolis intend to work in small, general practice firms rather than large, corporate firms. The author put forward several reasons to back his prospective, which is (1) small companies can provide greater job satisfaction, (2) a survey showed that freshmen in college mostly prefer a better job satisfaction. Then the author came to some suggestions in which he proposed big firms to offer better benefits to graduates in order to appeal them. After a reasonable analysis we can conclude that the whole article is based on some rash assumptions and illogical reasoning processes.

To start with, the author failed to list any reasons why smaller firms could give its employees a more satisfying job experience. Perhaps working in a smaller firm would evade fierce competition which colleagues, but it also raises the possibility of being laid off. As the market is limited, there would be few cases left for the smaller and less famous law firms. Once the firm is in want of cases, the newly recruited school graduates would be the first to be fired. Moreover, serving in small firms largely hampered the employee’s career life in that the stage is always too small. Thus, it's perhaps not because of the satisfactory of work but the drastic competition that many young graduates went to small firms.

Secondly, the survey was aimed to some first-year college students, therefore it was less reliable. Freshmen don't have a precise understanding of his or her future career or the status quo of the occupation compared to their seniors, thus they always have an unrealistic fantasy about future. As a result, the survey was unable to reflect the true minds of higher grade students which are more practical and credible, so any reasoning based on it would be not compelling.

Thirdly, although the author has made a detailed plan for large firms to appeal college graduates, he didn't give any talking point buttressing the idea that large firms really need new graduates. In all probability, the large firms are willing to recruit experienced veterans rather than green laymen. That would be much safer for the big law firms to maintain a sound reputation.

To sum up, if the author wants to make his article more convincing, he should find some solid evidences indicating that small firms can provide greater job satisfaction, and to conduct another comprehensive survey across senior grade students. Besides, he also ought to prove the large firms really have the need for newly-graduates, or his suggestion would not be practical at all.

atticuswangUID: 2663189

3 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."


F1. 刚毕业的学生应该是因为竞争激烈、工作经验不足才去小公司的，并非是因为小公司工作满意度高（因果）
F2. 问卷对象是大一学生，对自己的职业规划和行业认识都不深入，缺乏参考价值（调查）
F3. 大公司需要优秀的人才，而不是靠提高员工福利来吸引刚毕业的大学生（方法）（这个观点我不懂，那大公司应该怎样吸引优秀的人才？？）

Text

The article suggests that the local law school graduates in Megalopolis intend to work in small, general practice firms rather than large, corporate firms. The author put forward several reasons to back his prospective, which is/are (1) small companies can provide greater job satisfaction, (2) a survey showed that freshmen in college mostly prefer a better job satisfaction. Then the author came to some suggestions in which he proposed big firms to offer better benefits to graduates in order to appeal them. After a reasonable analysis we can conclude that the whole article is based on some rash assumptions and illogical reasoning processes.

To start with, the author failed to list any reasons why smaller firms could give its employees a more satisfying job experience. Perhaps working in a smaller firm would evade fierce competition which colleagues, but/even though it also raises the possibility of being laid off. As the market is limited, there would be few cases left for the smaller and less famous law firms. Once the firm is in want of cases, the newly recruited school graduates would be the first to be fired. Moreover, serving in small firms largely hampered the employee’s career life in that the stage is always too small. 接着写“但是还是有很多毕业生去小公司”，再推出结论……要不然读者会有点不知所措干嘛说小公司不好Thus, it's perhaps not because of the satisfactory of work but the drastic competition that many young graduates went to small firms.

Secondly, the survey was aimed to some first-year college students, therefore it was less reliable. Freshmen don't have a precise understanding of his or her future career or the status quo of the occupation compared to their seniors, thus they always have an unrealistic fantasy about future. As a result, the survey was unable to reflect the true minds of higher grade students which are more practical and credible, so any reasoning based on it would be not compelling.

Thirdly, although the author has made a detailed plan for large firms to appeal college graduates, he didn't give any talking point buttressing the idea that large firms really need new graduates. In all probability, the large firms are willing to recruit experienced veterans rather than green laymen. That would be much safer for the big firms to maintain a sound reputation.

To sum up, if the author wants to make his article more convincing, he should find some solid evidences indicating that small firms can provide greater job satisfaction, and to conduct another comprehensive survey across senior grade students. Besides, he also ought to prove the large firms really have the need for newly-graduates, or his suggestion would not be practical at all.
1# azoi