0910G【Try Best】第二小组 argument238 by vieri3221

vieri3221UID: 2611149

238The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Mira Vista College to the college's board of trustees. "At nearby Green Mountain College, which has more business courses and more job counselors than does Mira Vista College, 90 percent of last year's graduating seniors had job offers from prospective employers. But at Mira Vista College last year, only 70 percent of the seniors who informed the placement office that they would be seeking employment had found full-time jobs within three months after graduation, and only half of these graduates were employed in their major field of study. To help Mira Vista's graduates find employment, we must offer more courses in business and computer technology and hire additional job counselors to help students with their resumés and interviewing skills."

The president of Mira Vista College (MVC)’s recommendation of offering more business courses and hiring additional job counselors seems valid to improve job finding incidence. However, after examining the whole memo’s reasoning, I find several logical flaws-----the comparison of job finding incidence between MVC and Green Mountain College (MGC) is inapposite. The statistics cited by the author is unconvinced. Moreover, the relationship between business course and job finding presented in the memo seems not that obvious. In this article, I’ll analyze these logical flaws exist in the memo.

To begin with, the author makes a comparison between GMC and MVC, and contributes MVC’s high incidence of job finding to its more business courses and more job counselors. And this conclusion may masks other more significant facets that effect on GMC’s job finding incidence. For instance, GMC’s faculties may more suitable for the local necessity. Or the commercial situation may be the main reason of the gap of the job finding incidence between the two colleges. With this radical flaw, the president’s recommendation is failed in scratch line.

Besides a failed comparison, the conclusion that more business courses can improve the incidence of job finding is doubtful. More business course may bring mire commercial knowledge. As a comprehensive college, its graduates may need more knowledge in their major fields of study, which may be more effective to help them to find jobs. And business courses may have nothing to do with this for students except ones from business faculty.

Finally, I have to say that the statics the memo cites is absolutely not external. When the author analyzes that there are only half of graduates from the 70 percent of who were employed in their own field of study, he or she hasn’t a complete analysis of GMC’s 90% job finding incidence. What consists the 90%? It’s absolutely possible that there are more graduates from GMC hadn’t found jobs in the major field of study than MVC’s graduates. If it was the truth, the president may arriving at a reverse conclusion according the statics.

In short, the president’s recommendation may be rejected by the college’s board o trustees with those reasoning flaws revealed above. If the president wants to make his recommendation convinced, he or she may expand his comparison of the two colleges which need to consider other more significant facets that may influent the job finding incidence. Then the presidents may need to give us more comprehensive and convinced statics to substantiate that the situation of MVC’s graduates’ employment has a room to improve.

wangyao735UID: 2629777

1# vieri3221

wangyao735UID: 2629777

The president of Mira Vista College (MVC)’s recommendation  (可以这样缩写？)of offering more business courses and hiring additional job counselors seems valid to improve job finding incidence. However, after examining the whole memo’s reasoning, I （是不是要加一个have呢？这里是完成时对吧 However, after examining the whole memo, I have found several logical flaws.） find several logical flaws-----the comparison of job finding incidence between MVC and Green Mountain College (MGC) is inapposite. The statistics cited by the author is unconvinced. Moreover, the relationship between business course and job finding presented in the memo seems not that obvious. In this article, I’ll analyze these logical flaws exist in the memo.   记得新东方的老师说I和A是比较书面的文章，所以尽量用书面语也尽量不要缩写. 这里我觉得这样写要好点啊。(In the article, these logical flaws exist in the memo will be discussed below.)

To begin with, the author makes a comparison between GMC and MVC, and contributes MVC’s high incidence of job finding to its more business courses and more job counselors. And (应该是but 对吧？)this conclusion may masks other more significant facets that effect on GMC’s job finding incidence. For instance, GMC’s faculties may more suitable for the local necessity. Or the commercial situation may be the main reason of the gap of the job finding incidence between the two colleges. With this radical flaw, the president’s recommendation is failed in scratch line. 这里是存在时态错误吧。
Besides a failed comparison, the conclusion that more business courses can improve the incidence of job finding is doubtful. More business course may bring mire commercial knowledge. As a comprehensive college, its graduates may need more knowledge in their major fields of study, which may be more effective to help them to find jobs. And business courses may have nothing to do with this for students except ones from business faculty.你的这个攻击有点强词夺理哦，为什么不从其他地方入手呢？例如对GM 适合的对MV是不是一定适用呢？我觉得你的这个想法可以做一个小的点说一下，如果你拿来做一个大的逻辑错误来说的话好像不是很好说。不过你能想到这个很厉害哦。

Finally, I have to say that the statics （这是静力学？）the memo cites is absolutely not external. When the author analyzes that there are only half of graduates from the 70 percent of who were employed in their own field of study, he or she hasn’t a complete analysis of GMC’s 90% job finding incidence. What consists the 90%? It’s absolutely possible that there are more graduates from GMC hadn’t found jobs in the major field of study than MVC’s graduates. If it was the truth, the president may arriving at a reverse conclusion according the statics很厉害哦可以找到这个点来说。但是数据这个地方的问题好像很多啊，在what  consist the 90%这个地方是不是要展开一下说好呢？觉得有点仓促了。可以这样说: 作者在90%这个地方的定义不清，那90%的就业是从事本专业的呢？还是其他专业的呢？或则两着都有呢？在没有说清楚以前，我们不知道GM的就业优势是不是存在。如果不存在怎样。存在又有什么问题等。

In short, the president’s recommendation may be rejected by the college’s board o trustees with those reasoning flaws revealed above. If the president wants to make his recommendation convinced, he or she may expand his comparison of the two colleges which need to consider other more significant facets that may influent the job finding incidence. Then the presidents may need to give us more comprehensive and convinced statics to substantiate that the situation of MVC’s graduates’ employment has a room to improve.
总结：看的出你不喜欢使用模板，但是我建议你现在还是按照模板来练习。在逻辑上，第一段的论证很好哦，通过列举他因来表明GM和MV不存在可比性。也就是说不是由于商业课程GM和MV 的就业才不一样的。可是怎么你的第二段还是在从另一个方面列举他因来说明商业课程没有用呢？第三是说数据不可靠。总的来说哦，你这篇文章的逻辑结构不是很好啊。有点乱，三段好在攻击他的一个论据。实际这样写的话也可以，但是应该要层层深入还好点哦。好好看看范文，在分析一下范文的论证结构相信会对你有帮助的。