argument140[Savior小组]第四次作业

碎片UID: 2158883

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."

1, teaching
2, research abilities
3, will leave
1，质疑PT的教学
2，质疑PT的学术研究
3，没有证据表明她会走

This one-sided argument states that for Professor Thomas(PT)'s teaching and research abilities, she deserves a salary raise and promotion. The Committee probably regards it for

the purpose of preventing talents away from Elm City University(ECU). However, the statement is fraught with questions.

The PT'S abilities of teaching is doubtable according to what presents in this report. Only proof describing the number of students in her classes, can not determines the

assumption that PT enjoys a surge popularity in students for her excellent teaching. Suppose that PT always take her botany classes as required course for students majoring in

geography, gardening and other related subjects. Hence, a large number of students should attend this course to accomplish their majors in every semester. Or, Students are

inclined to choosing PT's botany classes as selective course for this subject might easily pass and get high marks.

The true research abilities of PT fail to be explained in this argument as well. The denotation she brought to researches weakly supports the point that she did well in

research. Firstly, the arguer points no evidences involving money that other researchers brought about. Thinking of numerous funds contributing to other researchers, by their

outstanding abilities in studies, PT might be not excellent than expected. Secondly, for well illustrating PT's research abilities, the argument should show either the detailed

contributions on the researches or certain breakthrough that PT probably has found in the field of botany.

Without scientific scrutiny of PT's teaching and researches abilities, the committee might treat other real talent professors unfairly. Even though PT's abilities make clear at

the end, the other doubts stands still: whether PT asks for higher salary and a promotion? whether PT will leave for current treatment? Perhaps PT only needs more attentions on

botany researches from ECU-more money and equipments devoted into them, for expansion of influence in ECU even in the area of botany. Also, PT would stay in ECU, for her passion

and devotion in it.

It is good for the committee to think about the treatments of teachers, but it also asks for more insightful evaluation in teaching and researching. To better the conclusion,

the committee should points out more detailed academic performances, and consider clearly what improvements are available for these professors.   （377字）
越写越少字，恐慌，欢迎批改！

lsyunxUID: 2443450

This one-sided argument states that for(referring to) Professor Thomas(PT)'s teaching and research abilities, she deserves a salary raise and promotion. The Committee probably regards it for the purpose of preventing talents away from Elm City University (ECU). However, the statement is fraught with questions(problems, question不能表示那种问题).

The PT'S abilities of teaching is doubtable according to what presents in this report. Only(The only) proof describing the number of students in her classes, cannot determines(应该用证实，justify或substantiate ) the assumption that PT enjoys a surge( in) popularity in(with, in后加地点) students for her excellent teaching. Suppose that PT always take her botany classes as required course for students majoring in geography, gardening and other related subjects. Hence, a large number of students should (have to) attend this course to accomplish their majors in every semester. Or, Students are inclined to choosing PT's botany classes as selective course for this subject might easily pass and get high marks.

The true research abilities of PT fail to be explained in this argument as well. The denotation she brought to researches weakly supports the point that she did well in research. Firstly, the arguer points no evidences involving money that other researchers brought about. Thinking of numerous funds contributing to other researchers, by their outstanding abilities in studies, PT might be not excellent than (前面没有比较级，as)expected.(这句没看懂，可以通俗点，如果其它老师申请到更多的研究基金，那么pt可能就没有期望的那么好) Secondly, for (表目的除了在句中可能用for，在开头好像用to更多点)well illustrating PT's research abilities, the argument should show either the detailed contributions on the researches or certain breakthrough that PT probably has found in the field of botany.

Without scientific scrutiny of PT's teaching and researches abilities, the committee might treat other real talent professors unfairly. Even though PT's abilities make clear at the end, the other doubts stands still: whether PT asks for higher salary and a promotion? whether PT will leave for current treatment? Perhaps PT only needs more attentions on botany researches from ECU-more money and equipments devoted into them, for expansion of influence in ECU even in the area of botany. Also, PT would stay in ECU, for her passion and devotion in it.我觉得第三个错误是即使PT有不凡的能力，也深受学生的爱戴，但PT是否真的要走，她要走，原因是什么，是因为工资职位太低，还是学校设备太差，科研环境不好，如果是后者，那即使提工资也没用。It is good for(太中文化了，Admittedly, the committee should pay attention to the faculty’s , especially the outstanding ones’, welfare) the committee to think about the treatments of teachers, but it also asks for more insightful evaluation in (the faculty’s )teaching and researching. To better the conclusion, the committee should points out more detailed academic performances of PT, and consider clearly what improvements are available for these professors(and find a more appropriate way to encourage the professor to work better.).

[ 本帖最后由 lsyunx 于 2008-3-9 07:46 编辑 ]