argument140 vivien 4月作文小组3月27日作业

vivien3773UID：2308910

140

In this report, the arthor recommends that Elm City University (ECU) should use a salary raise
and a promotion to keep Professor Thomas (PT). To support this recommendation, the author
points out that the number of students who take PT's class is the most in ECu compared to other
classes. The author also points out that PT had brought much research grants in each of the last
too years. As discussed bellow, this argument suffers from several critical flaws and is
therefore unconvincing.

To begin with, the author falesly assumes that a great number of students take PT's class
demonstrate that PT's class is popular among students. The author fails to accounting and
ruling out the possibility that PT's class is easy for stuents to pass so students inclined
to choose his class. If this it true, the author can not conclude that PT's class was good and
in high standard.

In the second place, the mere fact that the research money PT had gained each last two years exceeding his salary is
in sufficient to justify that PT's research abilities is perfect. It is possible that PT had
gained no research grants in the last 17 years except last two years. It is also entirely
possible that all other professors' research grants all exceeded their salaries and
more than PT's. Even PT's grants is high than others,the author fails to estabilish a causal
relationship between high research grants and excellent research abilities. It is possible that PT was good at getting
money but his research abilities is not good. Without accounting these possible explanations, it is sheer
folly to draw the conclusion that Pt has strong research abilities.

Finally, the author provide no evidence to support that without salary raise and promotion,
PT would inclined to leave ECU. The author overlooks that may be PT is loyal to ECU that he
want to work there for his whole life . Or perhaps PT liked the research environment in ECU but
did not care about the salary and promotion. Even perhaps PT have a good relationship with
his colleagues and did not want to move to another university to constructe new relationship
with new colleagues. Lacking detailed considerations about PT's feelings and needs, the author
should not recommend ECu to raise pT's salary and promote he to be department chairpersion.

In summary, the recommendation reached in this argument is not well supported. To make this
argument more persuasive, the author should provied more concrete evidences to demonstrate
that PT's research abilities is strong and his class is in high quality. Moreover, the author
need to prove that PT concern about Salary raise and promotion.

oceanusUID：2283238

In this report, the arthor（author） recommends that Elm City University (ECU) should use a salary raise
and a promotion to keep Professor Thomas (PT). To support this recommendation, the author
points out that the number of students who take PT's class is among the most in ECu compared to other
classes. The author also points out that PT had brought much research grants in each of the last
too years. As discussed bellow, this argument suffers from several critical flaws and is
therefore unconvincing.(很多人都在用首段的这个模版，可以考虑换一个或者不用模版)

To begin with, the author falesly（falsely） assumes that that (可以加一个)a great number of students take PT's class
demonstrate that PT's class is popular among students. The author fails to accounting（改为account） and
ruling(改为rule) out the possibility that PT's class is easy for stuents(改为students) to pass so students inclined(student 用现在时)
to choose his（her） class. If this is true, the author can not conclude that PT's class was good and
in high standard.

In the second place, the mere fact that the research money PT had gained each last two years exceeding his salary is
in sufficient to justify that PT's research abilities is perfect（原文也没说是perfect）. It is possible that PT had
gained no research grants in the last 17 years except last two years. It is also entirely
possible that all other professors' research grants all exceeded their salaries and
more than PT's. Even PT's grants is high than others,the author fails to establish a causal
relationship between high research grants and excellent research abilities. It is possible that PT was good at getting
money but his research abilities is not good. Without accounting these possible explanations, it is sheer
folly to draw the conclusion that Pt has strong research abilities.

Finally, the author provides no evidence to support that without salary raise and promotion,
PT would inclined(incline) to leave ECU. The author overlooks that may be(maybe) PT is loyal to ECU that(改为and) he
want to work there for his whole life . Or perhaps PT liked（改为likes） the research environment in ECU but
did（does） not care about the salary and promotion. Even perhaps PT have a good relationship with
his colleagues and did（do） not want to move to another university to constructe（construct） new relationship
with new colleagues. Lacking detailed considerations about PT's feelings and needs, the author
should not recommend ECu to raise pT's salary and promote he（her） to be department chairpersion（chairperson）.

In summary, the recommendation reached in this argument is not well supported. To make this
argument more persuasive, the author should provied（provide） more concrete evidences to demonstrate
that PT's research abilities is strong and his class is in high quality. Moreover, the author
need to prove that PT concern about Salary raise and promotion.

第二段论述不是很充分，三、四段论述很好，但首尾模版现象很明显而且有很多不该有的语法错误，可以粘到word里修改一下，加油！