argument140 教授加薪升职 互改！

chengnicoleUID: 2216897

TOPIC: ARGUMENT140 - 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."
WORDS: 394          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2006-7-6

The arguer suggests that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 salary raise and be promoted to Department Chairperson to prevent her leaving for another college. The suggestion rests on two major reasons. 1) She is popular among students since her classes are the largest at the university. 2) She has brought more research funding than her salary in each of the last two years. However, the conclusion remains problematic for several critical fallacies.

First of all, all the three factors the arguer presents to reach the conclusion are gratuitous. To begin with, the fact that her classes are the largest fails to convince us her popularity among students. No information about what she teaches in the university has been included in the discussion. It is possible that her classes are required courses that every student has to participate for the must-have credits. Moreover, the funding she obtained can not provide sufficient support to demonstrate her research abilities. If her research topics happened to be in line with some patrons with extraordinary big budget, she could gain more than others in the past two years. Nevertheless, the argument fails to provide any information to secure that she will get same amount of funding in the future.

Nevertheless, it is also unwarranted that Professor Thomas turns out to be so outstanding that could be entitled for a salary increase. Other professors might have more research achievements and higher popularity among students than her does. Even if she is qualified for a salary increase, why the increase amount should be $10,000? More rational explanation should be provided to support the recommendation.

The last but not the least, it is still not well reasoned that Professor Thomas should be promoted to Department Chairperson. Though she might be a good professor, she might not be a proper chairperson. There is no information about her capability in leadership and management mentioned in the argument. In addition, her own preference towards her career development should also be considered. Without further supporting, the hasty promotion decision would evoke other professors’ dissatisfactions.

In sum, the recommendation is weakened by the questionable preconditions, the unfounded salary and the unreasoned promotion target. The reputation, background and reputation of the university are very important elements that could influence the career decision. A real good professor will not leave the University only for higher salary or position.