April小组argument52

deerprinceUID: 2394244

Argument52
1)      论断忽略前提是公司能否有能力培养出好的设计师。
2)      论据不够充分，在AT采访的几名退休建筑师只有一名是大学生，情况与现在不同。
3)      结论很武断，论断说应改从高中生雇佣对建筑感兴趣的学生。但感兴趣不等于有能力。假如找大学生难，完全可以采用其他更好的方式解决。

In this memo, the human resources (HR) manager recommends that the firm would start an apprenticeship program and hire students who express an interest in architecture directly out of high school. To justify this claim, the arguer provides some evidences. But in my view, the memo is unconvincing for several critical flaws.

The major problem with this memo is that whether the firm has abilities to educate the architects. The aggressive apprenticeship sounds like a perfect project for the company, but the HR manager fails to think about the cost of the new project and the waste of time. We could not be told about whether we have enough money and enough skillful architects who teach the new apprentices. Maybe we have no plenty of resources to start such an aggressive plan. Instead, we could hire some skillful architects in this field or we can send some of the apprentice to study in the college.

Another flaw that weakens this argument is about the reliability of the interview by Architecture Today (AT). They just interviewed the retired architects, but at that time, the condition is far more different from nowadays. And the interview of AT only showed about the famous architects, we could not see the whole view about the education level of the all architects. Maybe the most famous architects are not accepted with this interview and most of them got a degree in the college.

In addition, it is questionable whether the high school students who express an interest in architecture have the needed capability to be a good architect. In high school, the students do not have a clear goal for the future job and their enthusiasm will be temporary. The HR manager could not cite the evidence to prove the possibility about training a student who is interested in this field would be a good architect.

To sum up, we can see the recommendation was undermined by its insufficient sample and false analogy. In order to strengthen the argument, the HR manager should prove the interview is really wide and convincible. Furthermore, the arguer would provide more evidences to make the resolving method that hire apprentices who are just out of high school strong enough.

brilliantsUID: 2347224

In this memo, the human resources (HR)(一般都知道吧）manager recommends that the firm would start an apprenticeship program and hire students who express an interest in architecture directly out of high school. To justify this claim, the arguer provides some evidences. But in my view, the memo is unconvincing for several critical flaws.
The major problem with this memo is that whether the firm has abilities to educate the architects. The aggressive apprenticeship sounds like a perfect project for the company, but the HR manager fails to think about the cost of the new project and the waste of time. We could not be told about whether we have enough money and enough skillful architects who teach the new apprentices. Maybe we have no plenty of resources to start such an aggressive plan. Instead, we could hire some skillful architects in this field or we can send some of the apprentice to study in the college.
Another flaw that weakens this argument is about the reliability of the interview by Architecture Today (AT)（这是什么？原创？）. They just interviewed the retired architects, but at that time, the condition is far more different from nowadays. And the interview of AT only showed about the famous architects, we could not see the whole view about the education level of the all architects. Maybe the most famous architects are not accepted with this interview and most of them got a degree in the college.
In addition, it is questionable whether the high school students who express an interest in architecture have the needed capability to be a good architect. In high school, the students do not have a clear goal for the future job and their enthusiasm will be temporary. The HR manager could not cite the evidence to prove the possibility about training a student who is interested in this field would be a good architect.
To sum up, we can see the recommendation was undermined by its insufficient sample and false analogy. In order to strengthen the argument, the HR manager should prove the interview is really wide and convincible. Furthermore, the arguer would provide more evidences to make the resolving method that hire apprentices who are just out of high school strong enough。

总体感觉表达清楚了意思，思路比较清晰。
建议尝试简单表达，考试时可能写不完那么多字。

[ 本帖最后由 brilliants 于 2008-4-4 22:01 编辑 ]