Argue 180 请大家批评指教 Luochenqu

[chenqu luo]

第一次在时间内完成的，比较紧张。写完一看，字数也忒少了点。心虚了，不知道是思路还不够开还是语言组织的不够好。

还请大家指教~

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."

WORDS: 383          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009-8-10 上午 11:33:44

很多其他公司最近指出他们的员工参加了Easy Read的速读课程之后生产效率显著提高。这个课程的一名毕业生能够在两个小时之内读完长达500页的报告，另一名毕业生在一年内从助理经理升任到副总裁。显然，你的阅读速度越快，在一天之内所能吸收的信息就越多。而且，Easy Read 的学费只有每人500元，考虑到它给Acme带来的效益的时候这就是个小数目。这个费用包括在Spruce City举行的为期三周的研讨会和Easy Read新闻刊物的钟声赠阅。显然，Acme通过要求所有员工参加Easy Read的课程将会极大地受益。

提纲：

1、课程是否是有效的： 公司生产率的提高是不是那些参加了课程的员工带来的？no evidence

                                    可能有其他因素：好的生产方式，更新设备等

2、两个毕业生的例子没有说服力： 读完就一定能读懂并且吸收？not necessary

                                                    升职是因为有好的阅读能力？no evidence

                                                    两个毕业生没有代表性

3、即使课程有效，对公司是否有用： 不同的公司，在不同领域；对不同员工的要求也不一样。

                                                       Acme可能对阅读的要求本来就不高，可能员工已经达到了公司要求。再参加就是浪费金钱和时间。

The arguer recommends that Acme should require all the employees to take the Easy Read course to benefit the company. To support his idea, the arguer cites that many company that have taken the Easy Read courses enjoyed an improved prodictivity, and he lists two graduates as typical examples to show the effectiveness of this course. However, for several reasons, the evidence offered in support to the recommendation provides little credible support for it. 

A threshold problem involves with the recommendation is the effectiveness of the course. The arguer states that the attending of Easy Read course contributes to the improved productivity of many companies. Yet, we are not imformed that the key factor and promotion of the productivity involves with those who have taken the courses. It is entirely possible that some other factors such as better manufacturing strategy, the introducing of  advanced equipments, lead to a higher productivity. Any of these scenarios will undermine the credibility of the course's effectiveness.

What's more, the two typical examples of all the graduates that have taken the course makes no sence in the demonstration of effectiveness.  The ability to read a long report within a short time does not necessarily indicates the ability to remember and understand all the information at the same time. And the other graduate's promotion may not results from his better reading ability. More importantly, only two graduates cannot represent all the graduates, thus make the arguer's statement less convincing. 

Another point worth considering about is the benefit the coures may bring to the Acme company. There is a common ground that different companies engages in different businesses and have different emphises on the ability of their employees. Perhaps not all the employees of Acme are required to have a good ability of reading. Maybe the reading ability of most employees have already meet the demand of Acme Company. Thus, attending Easy Course will obviously be a waste of money and time.

In sum, the arguer's recommendation is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, he must provide clearer and more evidence that the improved productivity is the result of attending the courses,  attending the course can really improve the ability to read and understand , and that taking Easy Read course is necessary and benefitial for the Acme Company. 

[Wang Tun]

不错哦~
语言应该没啥问题，字数确实少了点
可以再多找点错误，比如那个费用问题，虽然赠送，赠送的东西是否有用
并且每个错误的展开也可以更充分一些，用一些假设...之类的

加油~


Sincerely yours,
Wang Tun
ch4w...@gmail.com
2009-08-10

======= 2009-08-10 11:57, your message: Argue 180 请大家批评指教 Luochenqu =======

第一次在时间内完成的，比较紧张。写完一看，字数也忒少了点。心虚了，不知道是思路还不够开还是语言组织的不够好。

还请大家指教~

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday.. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."

WORDS: 383          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009-8-10 上午 11:33:44

很多其他公司最近指出他们的员工参加了Easy Read的速读课程之后生产效率显著提高。这个课程的一名毕业生能够在两个小时之内读完长达500页的报告，另一名毕业生在一年内从助理经理升任到副总裁。显然，你的阅读速度越快，在一天之内所能吸收的信息就越多。而且，Easy Read 的学费只有每人500元，考虑到它给Acme带来的效益的时候这就是个小数目。这个费用包括在Spruce City举行的为期三周的研讨会和Easy Read新闻刊物的钟声赠阅。显然，Acme通过要求所有员工参加Easy Read的课程将会极大地受益。

提纲：

1、课程是否是有效的： 公司生产率的提高是不是那些参加了课程的员工带来的？no evidence

                                    可能有其他因素：好的生产方式，更新设备等

2、两个毕业生的例子没有说服力： 读完就一定能读懂并且吸收？not necessary

                                                    升职是因为有好的阅读能力？no evidence

                                                    两个毕业生没有代表性

3、即使课程有效，对公司是否有用： 不同的公司，在不同领域；对不同员工的要求也不一样。

                                                       Acme可能对阅读的要求本来就不高，可能员工已经达到了公司要求。再参加就是浪费金钱和时间。

The arguer recommends that Acme should require all the employees to take the Easy Read course to benefit the company. To support his idea, the arguer cites that many company that have taken the Easy Read courses enjoyed an improved prodictivity, and he lists two graduates as typical examples to show the effectiveness of this course. However, for several reasons, the evidence offered in support to the recommendation provides little credible support for it. 

A threshold problem involves with the recommendation is the effectiveness of the course. The arguer states that the attending of Easy Read course contributes to the improved productivity of many companies. Yet, we are not imformed that the key factor and promotion of the productivity involves with those who have taken the courses. It is entirely possible that some other factors such as better manufacturing strategy, the introducing of  advanced equipments, lead to a higher productivity.. Any of these scenarios will undermine the credibility of the course's effectiveness.

What's more, the two typical examples of all the graduates that have taken the course makes no sence in the demonstration of effectiveness.  The ability to read a long report within a short time does not necessarily indicates the ability to remember and understand all the information at the same time. And the other graduate's promotion may not results from his better reading ability. More importantly, only two graduates cannot represent all the graduates, thus make the arguer's statement less convincing. 

Another point worth considering about is the benefit the coures may bring to the Acme company. There is a common ground that different companies engages in different businesses and have different emphises on the ability of their employees. Perhaps not all the employees of Acme are required to have a good ability of reading. Maybe the reading ability of most employees have already meet the demand of Acme Company. Thus, attending Easy Course will obviously be a waste of money and time.

In sum, the arguer's recommendation is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster it, he must provide clearer and more evidence that the improved productivity is the result of attending the courses,  attending the course can really improve the ability to read and understand , and that taking Easy Read course is necessary and benefitial for the Acme Company. 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wang Tun  | 王 暾

Undergraduate of Mixed Honors Class (Engineering)

Chu Kochen Honors College, Zhejiang University

Major: Optoelectronics, Department of Optical Engineering

Minor: Advanced Class of Engineering Education (ACEE)

Cell: (+86)136-5667-9099

Email: ch4w...@gmail.com
Address: Room 4073, Lantian 1^st Dorm, Zijingang Campus, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, P. R. China

[chenqu luo]

got it！

大谢~~~

AW加油！

2009/8/10 Wang Tun <ch4w...@gmail.com>

--
Luo Chenqu  罗晨曲
_____________________________________

Department of Industrial Engineering
Tsinghua University, P.R.China, 100084
Tel:86-15801338141 86-10-51531256
email: luoche...@gmail.com