ARGUMENT 222 第2篇习作 求拍！互拍！

青柠小可UID：2662026

第二篇习作了这篇也写了很久，欢迎/感谢大家狠狠拍我！

222.The following article appeared in a recent issue of a college newspaper.

"Among all students who graduated from Hooper University over the past five years, more physical science majors than social science majors found permanent jobs within a year of graduation. In a survey of recent Hooper University graduates, most physical science majors said they believed that the prestige of Hooper University's physical science programs helped them significantly in finding a job. In contrast, social science majors who found permanent employment attributed their success to their own personal initiative. Therefore, to ensure that social science majors find permanent jobs, Hooper University should offer additional social science courses and hire several new faculty members who already have national reputations in the social sciences."

1.不能只根据过去五年的调查就断定文科没有理科生就业好，也许理科学生喜欢固定工作，而文科的学会喜欢体验不同的人生所以不倾向找固定的工作，不能说文科的学生找固定工作有困难。况且文科生也许是在一年之后找到固定工作。
2.理科生好找工作不代表真的是归功于学校的威望也许是因为一段时期内社会对理科毕业生的需求量比较大。文科生不好找工作也不一定因为学校的文科不好，也许是社会需求量少，或者毕业生对就业的要求高。
3. 不是说找来有威望的教授就能保证就业率上升.

This argument seems at first glance to be well-presented and logical. However, several flaws appears after careful and thorough consideration.

Maybe it is the truth that tanks to the prestige of Hopper University’s physical science programs, some of the science major graduated students found permanent jobs without difficulty. It is unfair to say that all the science major students utilized the reputation of their college but their personality or professional knowledge to get a job. In contrast, social science majors graduated students shouldn’t entirely attribute the success to their own personal initiative. As is known to all, college is a place where students gain professional knowledge. Of course, the social major students who graduated from this university get the professional skills and knowledge as well. How could they even pass the interview without these knowledge which attained from the college? Whatever, it is the college who should be surely credited for either of the science major or the social major students, no matter who, succeeding in finding a satisfied job during their life.

And then, another point in this argument that the author makes a conclusion only through a survey of recent graduates also seems to be unreasonable. It says that the social science majors easily found permanent jobs within a year of graduation, whereas things turned out to be unfortunate for the social majors. The circumstance may be different after a deeply think. On the one hand, it may happens that the job market was really tight for the social graduates, and the employer raise the hiring level. On the other hand, although compared to the science major, the social major graduates didn’t find a permanent job within a year, they may succeed in getting a good job the next year or the social majors prefer a part-time job to a permanent one. Apparently, the ideal jobs for the science major students would be steady, logical and permanent. However, for the social majors, it’s important for them to have the ability to communicate with people because they have to face with different kinds of people all day to accomplish the work. As a result, instead of taking a permanent job, it would be wise for the social majors to take part-time jobs or change jobs frequently at first in order to increase their work experience and improve their professional skills. As mentioned above, it would be superficial to concluded that it is easier for science major students to get a permanent job because the survey couldn’t cover the thought and facets of all the graduates.

Finally, the point that new faculty members and new courses would help the students get a job is irrational. Firstly, no evidence could convict the readers that new faculty members may increase the employment status of the graduates. Secondly, it makes no sense asking students to take extra courses which may distract their concentration on major courses, merely to waste time and money.

All in all, this argument, while it seems logical at first, is not perfectly represented to the readers. It could be improved by providing evidence that the correlation is indeed a casual relationship--that the prestige of Hopper University causes the science majors finding jobs easily rather than social majors. The argument could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed causal relationship.

青柠小可UID：2662026

还是自己DE沙发