Argumemt 140[0806G-desperado小组]第6次作业by ancia

anciaUID: 2414298

Argu 140[0806G-desperado小组]第6次作业by ancia
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."

In this report, the Committee on Faculty Promotions and Salaries at Elm City University recommends a salary raise and a promotion for Professor Thomas. To support this recommendation, the Committee cites Professor Thomas demonstrated teaching and research abilities. Close scrutiny of each of these cause, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation.
First, the fact that her classes are among the largest classes at the university do not necessarily indicate that she is popular among students. Perhaps, the curriculum she teaches is compulsory for a large number of students or a great many students choose her class purely out of interest or curiosity in botany. For that matter, students will attend her class whether she is revered for demonstrated teaching or not. In short, without ruling out other possible reasons for which class she teaches is among the largest, the committee can not convince me on the basis of them that Professor Thomas is popular among students.
Secondly, the committee simply equates the ability to bring research grants to the university with research abilities. Moreover, the report fails to provide any evidence to support the assumption that the money Professor Thomas brings to the university is a big sum as for the research grant. Perhaps, manifold faculties in that university have managed to bring that much or more money due to the fine reputation of that university or advanced apparatus their laboratories are equipped with.
Thirdly, even if Professor Thomas is excellent both in teaching and researching, the report fails to substantiate that she deserves a salary raise as much as $10,000 and a promotion to Department Chairperson. Perhaps, financial crisis follows when so many faculties up to that standard for salary increase ask for a $10,000 increase. Besides, in recommending Professor Thomas for Department Chairperson, the committee fails to consider other possible chairperson candidates. Even if all the evidence shows that Professor Thomas is well qualified, maybe other individuals will be more suitable for the job. Without addressing this possibility, the committee can not convince me that Professor Thomas should be promoted to Department Chairperson.
Fourthly, the report relies on the unsubstantiated assumption that Professor Thomas will resign for the salary or position cause and she will not leave if she gets the salary increase and promotion. It is entirely possible that she is content with her current salary and position or she will leave for another university with other motivation such as for a better research environment.
In sum, the recommendation for a salary increase and a promotion of Professor Thomas is not well supported. Before I can accept it, the committee must provide more evidence of Professor Thomas ’s teaching and research abilities. Finally, to better assess the recommendation I need more information about Professor Thomas’s satisfaction with her current salary and position .