argument140 FLY AW小组第22次作业（403字）

夜一UID: 2130338

Argument140  第7篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：32分51秒     367 words
从2006年5月28日19时57分到2006年5月28日20时32分
------题目------
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.'
------正文------
The report suggests Elm City University that Professor Thomas should recieve a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. It demonstrates Professor Thomas's great teaching and research abilities, and indicates that the professor will leave for another college without such a raise and promotion. However, the conclusion of the report is not convincing enough to be accepted.

First of all, it is unverified to claim that Professor Thomas has excellent teaching abilities. Although her classes are among the largest at the university, this situation cannot be arbitrarily attributed to her popularity among students. Actually, the number of students in a class is determined by many factors besides the teacher's popularity, such as how many students are required to take the course, and how difficult the class is. Probably the huge number of students in Professor Thomas' class mainly results from the school's principle and the easy teaching contents, rather than the professor's popularity or teaching abilities.

Besides, it is unsubstantiated to conclude that Professor Thomas has perfect research abilities. Though she brought the school more money in research grants than her salary in the last two years, the other fifteen years of her entire seventeen teaching years at Elm City University has been completely disregarded. If Professor Thomas performed insignificantly in the other fifteen years, it is unreasonable to state that she has proved herself to be well worth her annual salary of $50,000. Moreover, no additional information demonstrates that she will continue to obtain a great deal of money in research grants in following years, especially more than her raised annual salary of about $60,000.

Furthermore, no evidence indicates that Professor Thomas will leave for another college if she cannot receive such a raise and promotion. At any rate, an annual salary of $50,000 is a remarkable amount of money that a professor can gain from a university. Neither has Professor Thomas showed that she would like to leave for another college without such a raise and promotion, nor has any college announced to provide Professor Thomas a higher salary or a more important position such as a Department Chairperson.

In conclusion, none of the reasons to offer Professor Thomas a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson, which have been illustrated by the report, including her teaching and research abilities as well as the possibility to leave for another college, are convincing enough to be accepted by the university.