* 총 작성시간 : 0분 2초 |
* 단어수 : 816 자 |
■ Direction You have 20 minutes to plan and write your response. You response will be judge on the basis of The quality of writing and on how well your response presents the points in the lecture and the relationship to the reading passage. Typically, an effective response will be 150 to 225 words. ■ Question Summarize the points made in the lecture you just heard, explaining how they cast doubt on the points made in the reading
| |
|
▶ Topic :
The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.
During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many accidents is fatigue caused by sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta, we recommend shortening each of our three work shifts by one hour. If we do this, our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep.
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation | |
|
▶ Your Answer :
The vice president of Alta Manufacturing advocates that in order to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta, each three work shifts must be shortened by an hour so that employees can get adequate amounts of sleep. The reasons for such conclusion is aroused by the statistics that thirty percent more on-the-job accidents occurred at Alta Manufacturing compared to that of nearby Panoply Industries. To suggest the validity, the vice president adduced the opinions of experts that accidents might have been the result by fatigue caused by sleep deprivation, since Panoply Industry workers work an hour less than the Alta Manufacturing. However, the reasons which the conclusion is based seem to have major fallacy that it is hard to be fully agreed on.
Firstly, the statistics contain information of only the past year. Just by confronting the statistical number of 30 percent and making such a decision would be a rather hastened decision and be of threat to the company’s future. The statistic value of the past year could have been an aberration compared to last five years, and the statistics would have shown totally different results, including the possibility of Panoply Industries having 40 or 50% more on-the-job accidents than Alta Manufacturing. Some devastating accident might have occurred once last year, which increased the statistical average value of the injured. To present a more suggestive reason, the decision should be made based on statistical information for at least 5 years.
Secondly, the passage fails to indicate the specific discrepancy of work performed between Alta manufacturing and Panoply Industries. Alta manufacturing may require jobs that are susceptible to several dangerous situations, while workers in Panoply Industries have least factors that can cause them harm. Due to the characteristics of different work circumstances, higher accident rates may be inevitable for Alta manufacturing. In this case, Comparison of two corporations itself becomes a major fallacy for the assertion given.
Thirdly, the vice president’s argument rests on the assumption that the factor for high accident rate is majorly due to fatigue caused by sleep. Yet, the vice president seems to overlook other factors that may have attributed to this consequence. Even if workers may be experiencing such fatigue, there may be paucity of safety facilities that may prevent accidents to happen. With thorough scrutiny of working circumstances may this argument be valid. In addition, the accidents may be a cause of inexperienced workers that Alta Manufacturing Hired recently. The statistics dully presents the percentage without any specified range of workers participated for such results. For more articulated evidence I highly suggest that the statistical values should be speculated with various ranges that qualify the results.
| |
토플은 글쓰기 만점으로 끝냈는데 그것도 6개월도 더 된 일이라서 그런지 오랜만에 글쓰는 데 죽는줄알았습니다.. ㅠㅜ
일단 브레인 스토밍 포함해서 30분~32분 정도 걸려서 썼구요, 결론도 못냈고 처음쓰는 아규인지라 엉망이라는 거 잘 압니다. 이 상태면 2.5-3정도 되려나요? 흠.. 일단 제가 어느정도 수준인지 알고싶어 글을 올립니다. 긴 평가도 좋지만 바쁘신 지알러분들이라는걸 알기에 점수만이라도 적어주시고 가시면 감사하겠습니다!!
(지금 다시 읽어보니 형편이 없군요 ㅠㅜ 틀린게 너무 많네요)