109。 Correctly measuring the productivity of service workers is complex. Consider, for example, postal workers: they are often said to be more productive if more letters are delivered per postal worker. But is this really true? What if more letters are lost or delayed per worker at the same time that more are delivered?
The objection implied above to the productivity measure described is based on doubts about the truth of which of the following statements?
a. Postal workers are representative of service workers in general.
b. The delivery of letters is the primary activity of the postal service.
c. Productivity should be ascribed to categories of workers, not to individuals.
d. The quality of services rendered can appropriately be ignored in computing productivity.
e. The number of letters delivered is relevant to measuing the productivity of postal workers.
觉得奇怪的是：从题目来说，这应该是条assumption的题目，因为问了这个objection is based on what?因此正确答案是D.
可OG的解释是：which statement would not be accetpted by those objecting to the measure?这不就成了weaken了？
晕了，开始弄不懂题目的意思了！哪位高人，能指点一下题目的意思！外加为何选D.
顶一下！牛牛门进来看看吧。
我觉得再仔细捉摸一下题目就会发现,题目的作者本身就反驳了一个观点,所以题目本身已经是一个削弱了,现在作者要找一个论据来支持他对 邮局工人生产效率问题的削弱
注意这里productivity of service workers 中的productivity 是指效率,效率不仅和工作的数量有关系还和工作的质量有关. 但是邮局工人said to be more productive if more letters are delivered per postal worker,他们说信越多,效率就越高,漏洞非常明显,如果他们错误投送和漏送更多,那么效率还高吗? 题目作者马上指出这个漏洞,现在考虑为什么工人说效率的时候只考虑工作量呢, 那就是他们现实工作中工作的质量根本就不被考虑, 所以基于这样一个现实,作者很不满,提出了这个问题. 那么就选 D了
不知道我这样分析对不对, 我是一个新手,大牛们一起来帮忙
呃---------
我发现我犯的错误了。问题我没有理解错。但我遗漏了compute 还有caculate的意思，所以我一直没弄懂为什么要ignore quality in computing productivity. 非常之汗颜！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |