argument140 [加州阳光]第二次作业

lixiaomin046400UID: 2207959

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: 572 （超时了）
      
In the report, the speaker recommends that they should raise Professor Thomas' salary from $50,000 to $10,000 and promote to Department Chairperson due to her teaching and research abilities; otherwise she will leave Elm City University (ECU) for another college. To support this recommendation the speaker points out that Professor Thomas' classes are among the largest at the university, which demonstrate her popularity among students. The speaker also shows that the money Professor Thomas has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years. I find this evidence problematic in several respects.

First, Professor Thomas' classes are among the largest at the university does not necessarily indicate that she is popular among students. Perhaps, she has the teaching mission to teach more classes. Or perhaps she is famous in botany; her reputation rather than teaching ability contributes to largest classes. Without ruling out other possible reasons for the largest classes the speaker cannot convince me on the basis of them that Professor Thomas is popular among students, let alone that she possesses high teaching ability.

Secondly, even if Professor Thomas' popularity among students is the case, the speaker assumes further that the money she has brought to the university in research grants has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years proves nothing. The report provides less evidence to show that two years ago she brought the equal research money to university or she will bring research money in the foreseeable future. It is entirely possible that this situation is just occasion. In addition, the money is little indication that she has the research ability. Thus, without better evidence that Professor Thomas will still bring research money and her research ability, the recommendation remains unconvincing.

Thirdly, even if Professor Thomas has teaching and research abilities that can teach and research well, the speaker relies on the assumption that she will be adequate to the Department Chairperson is unreasonable. Common sense tells us that with high abilities of teaching and research might not possess valuable administrative skills that would serve the department well. To the contrary it is entirely possible that dealing with administrative affairs takes him too much time to teach and research. If so, given that she can prove to be a good leader, whereas they lose a good teacher and researcher. In short, without ruling out this possible scenario, the speaker cannot convince me that Professor Thomas can be good at administrating, teaching as well as research.

Finally, even assuming that the forgoing assumptions are founded, the speaker fails to provide any evidence that Professor Thomas will leave for another college. Perhaps Professor Thomas has special affection with EUC and she never decides to leave the college. Or perhaps she has considered leaving the college for another famous college. She views reputation and developing space more important than such a raise and promotion. Therefore, lacing evidence that Professor Thomas will leave college, the speaker's conclusion is unfounded.

In sum, the recommendation is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it the speaker must provide clearer evidence that Professor Thomas is popular among students and possesses high teaching abilities. The speaker also bolster the recommendation by proving reliable evidence that she will bring research money in the future and is good at research. Moreover, I need more information about her valuable administrative skills and she may leave ECU for another college.