argument 140 请大家指教, 现在苦恼打字太慢呵呵

ssskyUID：204142

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.'
三个攻击点
1 教学能力
2 科研能力
3 别的学校的邀请

In this argument, concerning the topic of Professor Thomas' s promotion, the arguer provides some evidences and concludes that Professor Thomas should receive a $10,000 raise and a promotion to Department Chairperson. Through analyzing this argument carefully, I consider it si logically unconvincing in several respects, such as unsubstantiated evidences and hasty conclusion, as discussed below.

To begin with, the information provided by the arguer could not indicate Professor Thmoas's excellent teaching ability. The arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact that Professor Thmoas's classes are among the largest at the university and the conclusion that Professor Thmoas is popular among students. First, the subject that Professor Thmoas teaches may be a basic discipline, such as advanced mathematics, basic physics, and so on, and the instruction form of elementary disciplines is large class. Second, Professor Thmoas may assign high grades in her classes, because of which many students choose her class. In short, teaching  large classes  could not indicate the popularity of professors in universities.

Moreover, there is no concrete information in this argument which could demonstrate the research ability of Professor Thmoas. First, although the money brought by Professor Thmoas has exceeded her salary in each of the last two years, we have no sense about the information of other years and we could not validate the money is large fund without comparing with other professors.  Second, the ability of bringing money to the university in research grants does not completely equates the academic ability. A excellent professor should have the competence of  achieving the research items, however, in this argument the author does not demonstrate Professor Thmoas has achieved some improtant academical research.

Last, the arguer fails to provide valid information that Professor Thmoas will leave Elm City University for another college if she could not promote. Does Professor Thmoas have a significant academical status in that discipline so that other academic institution would like to invite her? Has another college really invited Professor Thmoas? Has another college promised department chairperson position and  higher salary?  We could not find answers about the aforementioned questions in this argument, and maybe Professor Thmoas himself advocates that another college invite her in order to get the raise and promotion.

In sum, the arguer fails to persuade us that Professor Thmoas could gain the raise in salary and promotion according to the evidences in this argument. To strenghten  it the arguer has to show that Professor Thmoas is really popular in students due to her instruction, and that she is competent for the position of Department Chairperson because of her ability of financing and research.