Argument9 Thrive小组第2次作业 (有拍必回：)

sunman163UID: 2404820

TOPIC: ARGUMENT9 - The following appeared in a memorandum from a dean at Omega University.
"Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of professors."
WORDS: 474          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2007-12-23 上午 01:35:06

In this argument,  a dean recommends that the Omega University should now terminate students evaluation of professors in order to enable its graduates to secure better jobs. At first glance, the author's reasoning seems logically, however, after closely scrutinizing, we may find the arguments is not well reasoned.

First of all, it is unjustifiable to presume that the score at Omega University are inflated is the result of the Omega University's new evaluating procedure, because many other factors might contribute to the higher scores. It is entirely possible that the students in Omega University studied harder than before since the evaluation procedure implemented or that the professors meliorated their teaching method so greatly that the students learned more from the class indeed, consequently, they got a higher score than before. Since the article fails to account for these alternative explanations for the inflated scores, the author cannot make any sound recommendations to the Universities.

Second, even if we assume that the students' score are inflated, there is insufficient evidence to bolster the author's reasoning, which, however, may lead to reasoning invalid and misleading. The author just concludes that employers "apparently" believe the grades are inflated without any evidence. As a result, we may think the arguer has some prejudices about the evaluating procedure. What is more, the arguer mentioned that the students in Omega University are not as successful as the students in the Alpha University in getting jobs, but without providing any information concerning whether there are similarity in these two universities. It is with a high hoodlike that the scores in Alpha University is higher than that in the Omega University, or that the average students' ability in Alpha University is indeed higher than that of Omega University, even that the Alpha University may adopt the evaluating procedure too. Hence, the evidence in the argument, which the dean's reasoning based on, cannot convince me at all.

In addition, the author fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact Omega University now terminate student evaluation of professors and the claim that it can enable its graduates to secure better jobs. This argument is unacceptable if there is no compelling evidence to support the connection between these two events. As we know, there are many other factors may effect securing better jobs, for instance, how many students in the major does the job market need and whether the economic is in depression, which with out doubt would have a great affection in securing jobs for the graduates. Thus, this causal relationship can not be justified just by the claim that terminating student evaluation of professors.

To sum up, this recommendation lacks of credibility. He or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore many aspects of the conclusion. To better assess the argument, the arguer has to provide more information about the above-mentioned possibilities.

icerainyfengUID: 2436324

In this argument,  a dean recommends that the Omega University should now terminate students evaluation of professors in order to enable its graduates to secure better jobs(是学生secure jobs？). At first glance, the author's reasoning seems logically（logical）, however, after closely scrutinizing, we may find the arguments is not well reasoned.
First of all, it is unjustifiable to presume that the scores at Omega University are inflated is（as） the result of the Omega University's new evaluating procedure, because many other factors might contribute to the higher scores. It is entirely possible that the students in Omega University studied harder than before since the evaluation procedure implemented or that the professors meliorated their teaching method so greatly that the students learned more from the class indeed, consequently, they got a higher score than before. Since the article fails to account for these alternative explanations for the inflated scores, the author cannot make any sound recommendations to the Universities.<br />
<br />
Second, even if we assume that（可以删掉吧） the students' scores are inflated, there is insufficient evidence to bolster the author's reasoning, which, however, may lead to reasoning invalid and misleading. The author just concludes that employers "apparently" believe the grades are inflated without any evidence（感觉和上面那句是不是重了？）. As a result, we may think the arguer has some prejudices about the evaluating procedure. What is more, the arguer mentioned that the students in Omega University are not as successful as the students in the Alpha University in getting jobs, but without providing any information concerning whether there are similarity in these two universities. It is with a high hoodlike that the scores in Alpha University is higher than that in the Omega University, or that the average students' ability in Alpha University is indeed higher than that of Omega University, even that the Alpha University may adopt the evaluating procedure too. Hence, the evidence in the argument, which the dean's reasoning based on, cannot convince me at all.<br />
<br />
In addition, the author fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact Omega University now terminate student evaluation of professors and the claim that it can enable its graduates to secure better jobs. This argument is unacceptable if there is no compelling evidence to support the connection between these two events. As we know, there are many other factors may effect securing better jobs, 下面要不要另起一句？for instance, how many students in the major does the job market need and whether the economic is in depression, which with out doubt（前面不是有for instance引导？要不要另外起头说呢?全凭语感） would have a great affection in securing jobs for the graduates. Thus, this causal relationship can not be justified just by the claim that terminating student evaluation of professors. 这个因果不合理是因为证据不足而不是结论吧？或者说这个因果关系不合理所以这个结论是不可靠的？<br />
<br />
To sum up, this recommendation lacks of credibility. He or she（the author？） has overlooked or chosen to ignore many aspects of the conclusion（是结论的什么方面吗?有点怪怪的。。。). To better assess the argument, the arguer has to provide more information about the above-mentioned possibilities.<br />
呵呵， 凭感觉改的。自己的水平有限。有些不知道应该怎么改，但是读起来有点怪怪的，就指出来的。<br />
自己还是有不少收获的，得到些灵感呢<br />
谢谢~~<br />
请多多指教~