0910AW 同主题写作第十一期 ARGUMENT9 by haiyue529（修改 by 草木也知愁）

haiyue529UID: 2600758

9The following appeared in a memorandum from a dean at Omega University.

"Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of professors."



In this memorandum, the author alleges that the evaluation of professor by the students should be stopped in Omega University in order to guarantee his graduates getting better jobs. To support this argument, the author cites the fact that the students graduated from Omega University are less successful in job hunting than that graduated from nearby Alpha University. This argument sounds logical, but it is unpersuasive and unconvincing after thorough analysis.

As the threshold problem, this memo suffer a “after this, therefore, because of this” fallacy in assuming that the score of the student of OU is inflated and caused by the evaluation of the professors. The sequence of these event ,in itself, does not suffice to prove that the earlier development caused the later one. It might be resulted from other alternatives included the improvement of the lectures given by the professor, the improvement of teaching facility, and the improvement of the students themselves , thus it was no strange that they got an increase in grade. Without ruling out possibilities mentioned above ,the author cannot claim that the increased score is inflated and assigned by the professor deliberately due to the evaluation procedure.

In addition, the author fails to provide any background or comparison of the two universities. The success to find a job is not only determined by the score of the students. It is also related to the graduated university itself, and the major or expertise of the students. The students graduated from higher ranked university, and the students graduated with a higher demanded major always better chance to find a job. Perhaps the Alpha University were better ranked than the Omega University, and the students graduated from Alpha University always have better chance to get a job offer even before the Omega University adopted the evaluation procedure. Also, the author failed to mention that the Alpha University does not adopted the evaluation procedure at all.

Last but not the least, regarded to the common sense the termination of the student evaluation of professors obviously has no good effects. It can at most reduce the students’ grades just in the situation that all the assumption the author assumes is tenable（which occurs rarely）, nevertheless，still does no good to the job finding of the students and may even have bad efforts. The real factors the employees concern about may be the term-work spirit, the manipulative ability, the comprehension and implementation capacity, ect. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the OU to provide more chance for students to improve the factors mentioned above than to terminate student evaluation of professors.(额我想说的中文如下
可用英文写出来觉得很别扭
不知道真么表达好：根据常识，取消教师评价并没有任何好处。他最多使学生的分数下降，在作者假设的前提都成立的情况下（这很少发生），就算这样对于学生就业也没任何好处甚至有可能有坏处。真正影响就业的因素是。。。所以o大学应该考虑给学生更多机会去提高上面所提到的方面，而不是去取消教师评价。)

TO sum up,this argument is not persuasive as it stands.In order to make it logical,the author should provide the author should provide more evidences as mentioned above to
establish a clear relationship between the implementation of the evaluation and the increase of the grades. To better evaluate this memo, I also need the information about the employment situation in the two universities before and after the implementation of the evaluation. In addition, what are the effects of the termination and what the employees really pay attention on should also be provided.

草木也知愁UID: 2487572

9The following appeared in a memorandum from a dean at Omega University.

"Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of professors."

..........................................................................................................


In this memorandum, the author alleges that the evaluation of professor（professors） by the students should be stopped（用词太生硬） in Omega University in order to guarantee his（its） graduates getting better jobs. To support this argument, the author cites the（a） fact that the（X，the的用法好好去补课看看语法）students graduated from Omega University are less successful in job hunting than that graduated from nearby Alpha University. This argument sounds logical, but it is unpersuasive and unconvincing after thorough analysis.

模板化严重，陈述赘余，语法点错的不少
自己好好看看这个贴
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=920961&highlight=
还有这个系列：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=959505&highlight=



As the threshold problem, this memo suffer a “after this, therefore, because of this” fallacy in assuming that the score of the student of OU is inflated and caused by the evaluation of the professors. The sequence of these event ,in itself, does not suffice to prove that the earlier development caused the later one. It might be resulted from other alternatives included the（X）improvement of the（X）lectures given by the professor（professors）, the improvement of teaching facility（虽然一个是在说课程一个是在说教师本身，但是和前一点的意思上存在重复）, and the improvement of the students themselves（去做好develop才可以，要不空空放上这两点，这样的蜻蜓点水是最忌讳的，凡是论点务必去展开，去挖掘，去点题。还有一点就是improvement的连用，先得词汇很贫乏） , thus it was no strange that they got an increase in grade. Without ruling out possibilities mentioned above ,the author cannot claim that the increased score is inflated and assigned by the professor deliberately due to the evaluation procedure.

刨除模板和原题的陈述，真正你自己的东西其实超不多二十个字吧，如果让你判卷你会怎么给分呢？rater不傻，ETS也不傻
自己看一下这两个帖子：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=912688&highlight=
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=923452&highlight=


In addition, the author fails to provide any background or comparison of the two universities. The success to find a job is not only determined by the（X）score of the students. It is also related to the graduated university itself, and the major or expertise of the students. The students（the students高密度的出现是对你文章可阅读性的一个打击，要做替换的） graduated from higher ranked university, and the students graduated with a higher demanded major （没这个搭配）always （缺动词，get、have） better chance to find a job. Perhaps the Alpha University were better ranked than the Omega University, and the students graduated from Alpha University always have better chance to get a job offer even before the Omega University adopted the evaluation procedure（这句话完全是把前面说的两句话揉在了一起，只能是无意义的扩充字数的，不好。行文一定要简洁，不要啰嗦）. Also, the author failed to mention that the Alpha University does not adopted the evaluation procedure at all（给了点之后就一定要去展开阐述，否则留一个undeveloped的point在这里反倒会给你的作文抹黑）.

Last but not the least, regarded to the（X）common sense， the（X）termination of the student evaluation of professors obviously has no good effects. It can at most reduce the students' grades just in the situation that all the assumption the author assumes is tenable（which occurs rarely）, nevertheless，still does no good to the job finding of the students and may even have bad efforts.（这句话弄得太长了，你的长句驾驭力还不够，会把rater弄晕的。还有就是上面说过的，一定要把每一个点都说明白说清楚） The real factors the（X） employees concern about may be the term-work spirit, the manipulative ability, the comprehension and implementation capacity, ect. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the OU to provide more chance for students to improve the factors mentioned above than to terminate student evaluation of professors.

这段的表达确实有障碍，是半看半猜才懂的，自己回去好好总结一下语言
同时对于这个题目，有不少topic逻辑主链上的推理破绽你没有去说，反倒单拿出一段来说一个末节，不太好的

TO sum up,this argument is not persuasive as it stands.In order to make it logical,the author should provide the author should provide more evidences as mentioned above to establish a clear relationship between the implementation of the evaluation and the increase of the grades. To better evaluate this memo, I also need the information about the employment situation in the two universities before and after the implementation of the evaluation. In addition, what are the effects of the termination and what the employees really pay attention on should also be provided.  

还是模板的事情...自己去改吧

haiyue529UID: 2600758

2# 草木也知愁

谢谢版主的修改，也谢谢推荐的那些帖子 我都去看过啦~
又修改过的文章，希望版版能在评价一下
注：1开头的写法还是没很想好，但除了开头段后面每一段都做了不少修改 就是开头怎么也组织不好 暂时变化不大 我会再认真多研究研究范文和那个帖子。

2看了那个一系列帖子里介绍冠词的。。不过对the的用法还是有些晕 就像第一段里我用红色标出来的那个the 这里不用the该用什么呢？望指教。。。

3 关于怎么展开的问题一直是我最头疼的问题 看了好几次官方范文 也看了许多介绍a的帖子 觉得自己所有文章的通病就是展开不够 于是刻意想加些展开 但是到底展开到什么程度是展开少了 什么深度又是废话了一直把握不好。。比如第二段（也就是正文第一段） 我不知道还该展开什么？写有什么可能让学生能力提高了么？总觉得写这个就有点跑题了。。。还是什么其他内容？

4最后一个问题 这个写的时候还是超时了。。字数统计了一下有480来字 希望能再稍微写少一些 因为感觉考场上30分钟内我敲字也就能到400左右 但是不知道怎么减了。。总觉得再减少字数就说不清楚了。。


修改后的文章~
In this memorandum, the author alleges that the evaluation of professors by the students should be ceased in Omega University in order to guarantee its graduates getting better jobs. To support this argument, the author cites a fact that the students graduated from Omega University are less successful in job hunting than that graduated from nearby Alpha University. This argument sounds logical, but it is unpersuasive and unconvincing after thorough analysis.

First, the author conveniently assuming the score of the student of OU is inflated and caused by the evaluation of the professors by the students. This argument is lack of sufficient evidence to support this claim. There are many reasons--such as the betterment of the lectures given by the professor, the retrofit of teaching facility(这个指的是教学设施的改进和前面不重复吧。。), and the improvement of the students themselves--could all result in higher score. Without ruling out all the possibilities mentioned above, the author cannot claim that the increased score is inflated and assigned by the professor deliberately due to the evaluation procedure.

In addition, the author fails to provide any background or comparison of the two universities. The success to find a job is not only determined by the score of the students but also related to the graduated university itself, and the major or expertise of the students. Perhaps the Alpha University were better ranked than the Omega University, and the students graduated from Alpha University always have better chance to get a job offer even before the Omega University adopted the evaluation procedure. Also, the author failed to mention that the Alpha University does not adopted the evaluation procedure at all. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the OU to re-adjust and optimize the major structure or to increase the expertise of the students than to terminate student evaluation of professors.

What’s more, successful at getting jobs doesn’t mean securing better jobs; there is still a big gap between find a job and find a better job. The author dose not provided us any information about what type of job the students found. Does majority of the students graduated from AU find professional jobs which will utilize their expertise, or the students just find any type of jobs? Without any data to support that, the author can’t conclude that the graduates from AU get better job positions than the graduates from OU.
It should be appreciated for the author to concern about the employment status of the students. However, it is too hastily for the arguer to draws the conclusion that we should eliminate the evaluation progress. To better evaluate this memo, I need more information about the employment situation in the two universities before and after the implementation of the evaluation. Besides, the author should also consider other alternative measures, which may be more effective to make improvement on the employment status.