Argument169 【☆09GRE作文冲刺组】swbai3月3日作文

swbaiUID: 2600532

题目：ARGUMENT169 - The following appeared in a letter from a department chairperson to the president of Pierce University.
"Some studies conducted by Bronston College, which is also located in a small town, reveal that both male and female professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. Therefore, in the interest of attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty and improving the morale of our entire staff, we at Pierce University should offer employment to the spouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offers to be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested in this effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chance of employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers."
字数：442          用时：0:30:00          日期：2009-3-3
In this letter the department chairperson, recommends that to hire the spouse of new faculty. To support this recommendation the chairperson cites the following facts about employ the spouse of the new stuff: (1) it will make the working of new stuff will work more efficiency; (2) the expenditure of employment will become fewer; (3) it can attract the most gifted teachers and researchers. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support on the recommendation.

First, employing the spouse of the new stuff do not necessarily indicates that the working efficiency of new stuff can be enhanced. Perhaps because the new stuff and the spouse become so close, that they tend to enjoy life than do any hard work. For this matter, perhaps the spouse have so many family problems for the new stuff to deal with, that the new stuff can not concentrate on the teaching and research. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for employing the spouse of the new stuff, the chairperson can not convince me on the basis of them that it can enhance the working efficiency of stuff.

Secondly, even if the working efficiency of new stuff is improved, the chairperson assumes further that the whole expenditure of the employment will become fewer. Yet the letter contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that because the university is hiring two person instead of one, that the expenditure doubled as well. In fact, perhaps because of the different jobs that the couple does, they actually cost more money.

Finally, employing the spouse of the stuff is little indication that the most gifted teachers and researchers are willing to come to this university. What the gifted person want is not the better job of the spouse, but the better performance of the new stuff himself/herself. In fact, what he/she wants most is the most talented stuff, which can inspires his/her thoughts. Besides, the equipment for experiment is also essential, which could make the research finally succeed or not.

In sum, the recommendation relies on doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation the chairperson must provide clear evidence-perhaps by local survey or studying-that employ the spouse stuff can enhance the working efficiency of the stuff, and it also can make less expenditure. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why employing the spouse can enhance the new stuff and cost less money. I would also need to know that why the most gifted teachers and researchers prefer their spouses to be hired in the same university.

sunshine5757UID: 2556418

1# swbai

In this letter the department chairperson, recommends that to hire the spouse of new faculty. To support this recommendation the chairperson cites the following facts about employ the spouse of the new stuff: (1) it will make the working of new stuff will work more efficiency; (2) the expenditure of employment will become fewer; (3) it can attract the most gifted teachers and researchers. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support on the recommendation.（对于第一个论点有点个人想法：因为题干没有提到会提高工作效率，只是说员工的士气会增加，但是难道这能直接和工作效率挂钩吗？）

First, employing the spouse of the new stuff do not necessarily indicates that the working efficiency of new stuff can be enhanced. Perhaps because the new stuff and the spouse become so close, that they tend to enjoy life than do any hard work. For this matter, perhaps the spouse have so many family problems for the new stuff to deal with, that the new stuff can not concentrate on the teaching and research. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for employing the spouse of the new stuff, the chairperson can not convince me on the basis of them that it can enhance the working efficiency of stuff.

Secondly, even if the working efficiency of new stuff is improved, the chairperson assumes further that the whole expenditure of the employment will become fewer. Yet the letter contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that because the university is hiring two person instead of one, that the expenditure doubled as well. In fact, perhaps because of the different jobs that the couple does, they actually cost more money.

Finally, employing the spouse of the stuff is little indication that the most gifted teachers and researchers are willing to come to this university. What the gifted person want is not the better job of the spouse, but the better performance of the new stuff himself/herself. In fact, what he/she wants most is the most talented stuff, which can inspires his/her thoughts. Besides, the equipment for experiment is also essential, which could make the research finally succeed or not.

In sum, the recommendation relies on doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation the chairperson must provide clear evidence-perhaps by local survey or studying-that employ the spouse stuff can enhance the working efficiency of the stuff, and it also can make less expenditure. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why employing the spouse can enhance the new stuff and cost less money. I would also need to know that why the most gifted teachers and researchers prefer their spouses to be hired in the same university.


这片文章逻辑好清晰阿，这种写法很好—在开头段罗列出反驳的论点，这样让读者有了明确的思路。另外有些地方有点小小的文法错误，不过问题不大

sunshine5757UID: 2556418

我错了,没改字体大小
重新发一遍

In this letter the department chairperson, recommends that to hire the spouse of new faculty. To support this recommendation the chairperson cites the following facts about employ the spouse of the new stuff: (1) it will make the working of new stuff will work more efficiency; (2) the expenditure of employment will become fewer; (3) it can attract the most gifted teachers and researchers. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support on the recommendation.（对于第一个论点有点个人想法：因为题干没有提到会提高工作效率，只是说员工的士气会增加，但是难道这能直接和工作效率挂钩吗？）

First, employing the spouse of the new stuff do not necessarily indicates that the working efficiency of new stuff can be enhanced. Perhaps because the new stuff and the spouse become so close, that they tend to enjoy life than do any hard work. For this matter, perhaps the spouse have so many family problems for the new stuff to deal with, that the new stuff can not concentrate on the teaching and research. In short, without ruling other possible reasons for employing the spouse of the new stuff, the chairperson can not convince me on the basis of them that it can enhance the working efficiency of stuff.

Secondly, even if the working efficiency of new stuff is improved, the chairperson assumes further that the whole expenditure of the employment will become fewer. Yet the letter contains no evidence to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence it is equally possible that because the university is hiring two person instead of one, that the expenditure doubled as well. In fact, perhaps because of the different jobs that the couple does, they actually cost more money.

Finally, employing the spouse of the stuff is little indication that the most gifted teachers and researchers are willing to come to this university. What the gifted person want is not the better job of the spouse, but the better performance of the new stuff himself/herself. In fact, what he/she wants most is the most talented stuff, which can inspires his/her thoughts. Besides, the equipment for experiment is also essential, which could make the research finally succeed or not.

In sum, the recommendation relies on doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation the chairperson must provide clear evidence-perhaps by local survey or studying-that employ the spouse stuff can enhance the working efficiency of the stuff, and it also can make less expenditure. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know why employing the spouse can enhance the new stuff and cost less money. I would also need to know that why the most gifted teachers and researchers prefer their spouses to be hired in the same university.


这片文章逻辑好清晰阿，这种写法很好—在开头段罗列出反驳的论点，这样让读者有了明确的思路。另外有些地方有点小小的文法错误，不过问题不大