GRE® essay: should all faculty working outside the academic world?

[Funnyjack]

hi folks. im a greenhand of gre, and this is my debut. i'll appreciate if you can review it and give your suggestions

here's the topic
In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.

I fundamentally disagree with the speaker's assertion that all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world because the demerits outweigh merits.

Admittedly, it is common throughout the world that universities and colleges provide few, if any, courses to equip undergraduates with knowledge and skills needed in the workplace, so in many people's views, a gap exists between what students learn in classes and what they are about to need for a living in the future. It is reasonable to recommend faculty to work outside the academic world, maybe taking jobs in corporations. In this way, those tutors will be more understanding of the importance of the skill-provided classes. Meanwhile, they may probably come up with a better teaching method to involve pure knowledge with what needed in the workplace, from which both students and enterprises benefit. In this regard, I approve of the speaker's claim--faculty working in professions relevant to the courses they teach does be helpful to improve the quality of instruction.

However, the discussion above is quite ideal and unacceptable. Turn first to the feasibility of the assertion. Generally speaking, when a department is mature enough, its number of the staff stays stable. If teachers are obliged to spend time outside academy, research and teaching of the department will obviously be chaotic. After all, to employ and assess teachers is not an easy game. Without enough teachers, how can a university continue to provide as many courses as usual. Besides, we have not considered the protagonists' willingness. Some professors are ready to sacrifice time to enhance instruction level, while some others prefer to devote their time to research. In a word, not every professor will agree with the assertion. How can we expect them to put out their mind and heart with them not being voluntary. Even though some of them are forced to obey the "arrangement", then how can we expect them to ensure the quality?

Turn next to exceptional subjects that are hardly relevant to neither domestic life nor industrial manufacturing. These exceptions focus more in nature itself other than practical use. Look no further than the fact some researchers do their work only because of interests. They do not care about whether their research turn out to be a milestone in science or end with a breakthrough in daily life. It is true many professors in universities belong to this kind of people, and by that I mean they are restricted to academic world. Real life has nothing to do with what they devote their time to. For supporting examples, can archeology contribute to current modern economic system or improve people's life quality? Not necessarily. The reason why there are so many people fascinated in archeology might be they want to realize where human beings derive and how we evolve, as well as the changes in culture. And the best way to lift the level of instruction about archeology lies in academic exchanges and communications. It is more helpful to give a seminar than selling a dinosaurian egg for an auction company.

To sum up, even though, in some ways, faculty spending time working outside academic world is benefit to instruction, the feasibility has to be examined and teachers' will must be considered. Most important, some fields only exist in academic world.

[Kitosdad]

hi folks. im a greenhand of gre, and this is my debut. i'll appreciate if you can review it and give your suggestions

here's the topic
In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.

I fundamentally disagree with the speaker's assertion that all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world because the demerits outweigh merits.

Admittedly, i It is common throughout the world that universities and colleges provide few, if any, courses to equip undergraduates with THE knowledge and skills needed in the workplace, so in many people's views, a gap exists between what students learn in classes and what they are about to need for a TO EARN A living in the future. It is reasonable to recommend THAT faculty NEED to work outside the academic world, maybe taking jobs in corporations. In this way, those tutors will be more understanding of the importance of the skill-provided IN classes. Meanwhile, they may probably come up with a better teaching method to involve pure knowledge with what IS needed in the workplace, from which both students and enterprises benefit. In this regard, I approve of the speaker's claim--faculty working in professions relevant to the courses they teach does be helpful to improve the quality of instruction.

However, the discussion above is quite ideal and unacceptable. Turn first to the feasibility of the assertion. Generally speaking, when a department is mature enough, its numberS of the staff stays stable. If teachers are obliged to spend time outside OF THE academy, research and teaching of the department will obviously be chaotic. After all, to employ and assess teachers is not an easy game. Without enough teachers, how can a university continue to provide as many courses as usual(?)
Besides, wWe have not YET considered the protagonists' willingness. Some professors are ready to sacrifice THEIR time to enhance instruction level, while some others prefer to devote their time to research. In a word, not every professor will agree with the assertion. How can we expect them to put out their mindS and heartS with them not being ACCEPTING THIS PROPOSITION voluntarILY(?) Even though some of them are forced to obey the "arrangement", then how can we expect them to ensure PROVIDE the REQUISITE quality?

Turn next to exceptional subjects that are hardly relevant to neither domestic life nor industrial manufacturing. These exceptions focus more ON nature itself other RATHER than ON practical use. Look no further than the fact some researchers do their work only because of SELF-interests. They do not care about whether their research turnS out to be a milestone in science, or THAT IT endS with a breakthrough in daily life. It is true many professors in universities belong WITHIN this kind GROUP of people, and by that I mean they are restricted to THE academic world. Real life has nothing to do with what they devote their time to. For supporting examples, can archAeology contribute to current modern economic system or /improve/CONTRIBUTE TO/ people's life quality OF life? Not necessarily. The reason why there are so many people fascinated in archAeology might be they want to realize FROM where human beings derive and how we evolveD, as well as the changes in culture. And t The best way to lift the level of instruction about archAeology lies in academic exchanges and communications. It is more helpful to give a seminar than selling a dinosaurian egg AT an auction company.

To sum up, even though in some ways, faculty spending time working outside THE academic world is benefICIAL to instruction, the feasibility has to be examined and teachers' will must be considered. More importantLY, WE SHOULD REMEMBER THAT some fields only exist in THE academic world.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Good work Jack. Even I understood that.

Kitos. 8.5/10
_________________
Keep it simple ... Keep it interesting.

[Funnyjack]

kito
you see, even i myself have found out this problem for a long time--I can't use coherent and cohesive words (like and, besides,ect) correctly. i dont know why, and i dont know how to correct because my teacher never taught about the usage of these words.
can you give me some advice?
thanks so much

[Kitosdad]

HI Jack, If you were to read a lot of the essays posted here you will find that most sentences can have the opening word removed and still the meaning remains quite clear. Words like, and, but, maybe,then, and lots of others are used because this is the way the writer usually speaks. Writing these in informal letters is fine, but in the formal tests they are frowned upon.
_________________
Keep it simple ... Keep it interesting.

[Madhu_2010]

Hi Kitos,
I was preparing for GRE and thought of giving it next month. I was able to understand the AWA topic but while writing the essay I found it difficult to wrote that, i.e., I was doing some mistakes. Its hurts me and am a bit nervous for choosing the GRE again. Also, I was becoming pall while reading all wordlists. So could you suggest me how to read it. Its a worry thing for me.

[Funnyjack]

hi,kito
here's an examiner's comment: the linking words are well used.....
so, what does these linking words represent?(maybe like, on the other hand, besides, furthermore, other than simply and,but?)