argument3 第一次写argu啊求拍

starshaneUID: 2616355

OPIC: ARGUMENT3 - The following appeared in a newspaper article about law firms in the city of Megalopolis.

"In Megalopolis, the number of law school graduates who went to work for large, corporate firms declined by 15 percent over the last three years, whereas an increasing number of graduates took jobs at small, general practice firms. Even though large firms usually offer much higher salaries, law school graduates are choosing to work for the smaller firms most likely because they experience greater job satisfaction at smaller firms. In a survey of first-year students at a leading law school, most agreed with the statement that earning a high salary was less important to them than job satisfaction. This finding suggests that the large, corporate firms of Megalopolis will need to offer graduates more benefits and incentives and reduce the number of hours they must work."
WORDS: 374
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/3/18 19:57:55


In his deduction the arguer suggested that the number of law school graduates working in large firms has reduced by 15 percent while their counterparts in small, general firms is increasing because small firms provide more job satisfaction. He even cited a survey of fresh-man students in law schools to consolidate his statement that job satisfaction, not high salary, is the main attraction for students. He then put forward his conclusion that large firms should offer more benefits and incentives in order to absorb more employers. However these assertions don't seem logic to me in three ways.

1，工作人数下降的他因，可能是大公司自己提高了招聘标准或职位少了，一些人不得不去小公司
In the first place, the reason that there are less law school graduates working in large firms and more graduates in small firms maybe various. Most likely it is because the employment standard of large firms has been elevated in an effort to choose really excellent graduates, or there is less job vacancies open to newly graduates. This does not indicate that undergraduates do not wish to go into large firms where they can receive higher salary and better expertise training, which is most alluring for new comers in the labor force. Consequently the competition among graduates to work in large firms is fiercer thus forcing those who are not chosen by large firms to go into small firms instead. In other words, graduates are probably unwillingly or involuntarily working in small firms.

2，各人对job satisfaction的感觉不一，有志气的人觉得在大公司工作就够满意了，没在大公司工作的人没资格说在大公司的满意度低
The second doubt is about job satisfaction. Whether working in small or large firms provides higher job satisfaction? The answer may be highly contingent. Different students have respective understandings about “job satisfaction”. For those ambitious and enterprising graduates who want to really make a difference in the legal system, beginning at a prestigious law firm is a perfect starting point for their life long career, therefore they felt more satisfied and self-fulfilled doing painstaking jobs and getting paid. For those who merely wish to scrape by and live it the easy way, no job is really satisfactory for them other than “dreamer” or “player”. Furthermore, graduates who claim to feel more job satisfaction in small firms may have never work in large firms, thus they are not justified to compare which type of firms really provide more satisfaction.

3，调研的可信度质疑，对象错误，不具代表性
In the third place, the survey mentioned by the arguer lacks convincing investigation targets-- the objects surveyed are first-year students who are mostly ignorant about the brutal competition in the labor market. Freshman year is largely about fun and leisure, and students expect that carefree years could last even when they start to work. The truth is that no pain, no gain. If the survey was conducted among senior students, the result may be quite opposite. Besides, the students enquired may mainly come from social upper class so that they care less about the starting salary, but for those who come from ordinary family, salary is definitely an important element to consider when choosing jobs and large firms with high salary are warmly welcomed. Moreover, a survey on one particular school cannot reflect the real job inclination of all whole Megalopolis. Students from less notable law schools may respond differently.

Based on the rebuttals above, I am positive that the reason for decreasing numbers of graduates in large firms can be spontaneous adjustment, and that the survey could not substantially support the arguer’s affirmation. It seems to me that the large firms do not have to reduce work hours to promote job satisfaction.




Revised version 534 words

明天的鞋子UID: 2639625

In his deduction the arguer suggested that the number of law school graduates working in large firms has reduced by 15 percent while their counterparts in small, general firms is increasing because small firms provide more job satisfaction. He even cited a survey of fresh-man students in law schools to consolidate his statement that job satisfaction, not high salary, is the main attraction for students. He then put forward his conclusion that large firms should offer more benefits and incentives in order to absorb more employers. However these assertions don't seem logic to me in three ways.

1，工作人数下降的他因，可能是大公司自己提高了招聘标准或职位少了，一些人不得不去小公司
In the first place, the reason that there are less law school graduates working in large firms and more graduates in small firms maybe various（.去掉句点） most（Most小写） likely （去掉it） is （去掉because） the employment standard of large firms has been elevated in an effort to choose really excellent graduates, or there is less job vacancies opening（open改成opening） to newly graduates. This does not indicate that undergraduates do not wish to go into large firms where they can receive higher salary and better expertise training, which is most alluring （去掉for）new comers into the labor force（allure sb. into/to….）. Consequently the competition among graduates to work in large firms is fiercer thus forcing those who are not chosen by large firms to go into small firms instead. In other words, graduates are probably unwillingly or involuntarily working in small firms.

2，各人对job satisfaction的感觉不一，有志气的人觉得在大公司工作就够满意了，没在大公司工作的人没资格说在大公司的满意度低
（建议本段可以对job satisfaction进行一个定义，或者比较明确的阐释。然后基于此进行分析辩驳）

The second doubt is about job satisfaction. Whether working in small or large firms provides higher job satisfaction? The answer may be highly contingent. Different students have respective understandings about “job satisfaction”. For those ambitious and enterprising graduates who want to really make a difference in the legal system, beginning at a prestigious law firm is a perfect starting point for their life long career, therefore they felt more satisfied and self-fulfilled doing painstaking jobs and getting paid. For those who merely wish to scrape by（sth.） and live (去掉it the) an easy life(去掉way), no job is really satisfactory for them other than “dreamer” or “player”. Furthermore, graduates who claim to feel more job satisfaction in small firms may have never work in large firms, thus they are not justified to compare which type of firms really provide more satisfaction.

3，调研的可信度质疑，对象错误，不具代表性
In the third place, the survey mentioned by the arguer lacks convincing investigation targets-- the objects surveyed are first-year students who are mostly ignorant about the brutal competition in the labor market. Freshman year is largely about fun and leisure, and students expect that carefree years could last even when they start to work. The truth is that no pain, no gain. If the survey was conducted among senior students, the result may be quite opposite. Besides, the students enquired may mainly come from social upper class so that they care less about the starting salary, but for those who come from ordinary family, salary is definitely an important element to consider when choosing jobs and large firms with high salary are warmly welcomed. Moreover, a survey on one particular school cannot reflect the real job inclination of all whole Megalopolis. Students from less notable law schools may respond differently.

Based on the rebuttals above, I am positive that the reason for decreasing numbers of graduates in large firms can be spontaneous adjustment（没弄明白，感觉是在讲大型律师事务所就职人数的减少是可以理解的，或者是自然而然的，但语句不是很能让人理解）, and that the survey could not substantially support the arguer’s affirmation（可以放在本段前部）. It seems to me that the large firms do not have to reduce work hours to promote job satisfaction（正文中没有进行阐释，只进行一句话总括的话，稍显突兀）.

提纲这样列会不会逻辑上更紧密点儿（仅为参考建议）：
      开篇第一段
      过去三年间在大型合伙事务所就职的法学院毕业生数量下降了15％，而在小型，一般性事务所就职的毕业生数量则在增加。这种情况的出现，并不一定是因为在小事务所就职更有工作满足感，有可能是因为大型事务所提高了入职门槛，导致更多法律系毕业生不得不选择去小型事务所就业。
      调查可信度有待考证（被调查者的样本代表性值得商榷）
      对job satisfaction的定义或自己的阐释。即便是针对顶尖法学院一年级学生的调查结果可信，即多数人同意挣更多的钱没有工作满足感重要，这也并不代表在满足个人的工作满足感的同时，人们不愿意去挣更多的钱，二者并无冲突。文章并没有说服性的理由证明，在提供高薪水的大型事务所工作的满足感低于在小型事务所工作。
      总结段