▶ Your Answer :
While it is constantly debated that money does not translate into happiness,
satisfaction or quality life, it is undeniably a powerful force powerful enough to
motivate most of us in today's competitive world. ((The prevalence of individuals
striving to become white-collared workers rather than blue-collared laborers
despite the former's high academic demands strongly exemplifies this notion.))<-불필요This also relates to a
discussion on whether more money should be spent on university professors, many
of whom have gone through various gruelling challenges to satisfy their need:
money. ->주제문을 좀 더 정확하게 제시해주세요 Because our
drives to succeed are so strongly influenced by wealth, my preference goes
towards increasing their salaries.
An increase in pay would promote better performance among of professors generally
receiving income proportional to their quality of teaching.그들이 교육의 질에 따라 돈을 받으면 better performance를 낸다는건가요, 아니면 현재 일반적으로 “교육의 질에 따라 돈을 받고있다”고 말하는 건가요? If the situation was inverted so that the changes in salaries do
not necessarily reflect the changes in skills of lecturing, the professors would
see little justification in working with extra effort for no significant gain,
discouraging them trying their hardest. ->정확히 무슨 뜻인가요? On the other hand, a salary increase for improvement would
foster a competitive environment for university professors, in which they would attempt to outperform
one another in their respective fields in order to prove they are worthy of
increased incomes. Of course, this phenomenon would not occur very dramatically
as the description of this "competition" might suggest. However, the
essence of working furiously to further their rewards would exist nonetheless.
Another reason for favoring increased salaries for university professors is
rooted in a philosophical principle called minimalism, optimizing outcomes
by minimizing trivial aspects and maximizing important ones. Assuming that
the physical structure of a facility is developed well enough to prevent
external environments from affecting students' learning, there is little else
than professors' salaries that more money could be spent on for could make meaningful
improvements in terms of quality of education. Other aspects of universities, including physical structures, have limits to which
it could improve student's performance; after all, transition from an already
functional cement to an expensive golden wall does not make a better student.
Raising salaries of the lecturers, on the other hand, could bring unlimited improvements to the teaching
facility,<-이는 위에서 언급한 physical structure of a facility와
어떻게 다르죠? 또 다른 요소와는 달리, 구체적으로 "어떤" unlimited improvement를 가져오나요? much like
capitalism bringing better technology every year. Why not spend more money on an aspect that could infinitely improve learning
environment rather than ones that have limited potential?
More spending on university professors' salaries could foster learning
environments with quality teaching and motivated professors that spending on
another factor feature of the facility cannot provide.
Writing 0–30 score
scale
Fair (16-20)
불필요하게 길어지거나 단어가 과하게 사용된 문장들이 있어, 종종 문장의 정확한 의미를 파악하기 어렵습니다. 주제와 크게 관련없는, 불필요한 내용을
화려하게 설명 하는 데에 많은 부분을 할애하기 보다는, 핵심적인 근거와 주장을 정확하고 논리적으로 매끄럽게
설명해주는 것이 중요합니다. 또한 첫 번째 근거와 두 번째 근거가 잘 구분되지 않는데, 더 명확하게 설명해주시면 더 좋겠습니다. 수고 많으셨습니다^^ |