GRE写作中能够同时兼顾立论文ISSUE和驳论文ARGUMENT两篇作文高分的考生较少,许多同学都是在保证一篇文章平均水平的前提下努力写好另一篇文章来提分的。下面小编就和大家分享GRE写作立论驳论文提分心得,来欣赏一下吧。
GRE写作立论驳论文提分心得
GRE立论文issue经验分享
对于立论文(Issue)说,我觉得自己动手拟一份提纲是非常有用的,你可以参考各种资料,但必须勤动脑,想一想提纲的逻辑连续性。实际上,有偏向性、但又不要绝对化的思路才是最易上手的。
GRE驳论文argument怎么练?
对于驳论文(Argument)而言,我认为熟悉题库更为重要。正常情况下是这样的,但的确有些难题若不事先好好准备,五分钟之内能找出两个错误就不错了。在第一次考试时,我正是因为在准备时放掉了一道我只找出两个错误的题目,而在正式考试时恰恰碰到了这道题目,所以写得很不好。
写驳论文有很多小窍门,如需要锻炼出区别“事实”和“观点”的能力,不论题目中所给的事实有多夸张都需认为它是对的,不能攻击,只能攻击观点中的逻辑漏洞;凡是跟统计数字、统计方法有关的逻辑错误都尽量不要攻击,最多只能一笔带过等等。
GRE作文逻辑重要吗?
虽然逻辑作文满分只有6分,可千万别小看了它的重要性。从某种程度上来说,它是GRE的精华——因为GRE考的就是逻辑,用英语写两篇作文只是形式而已,主要目的就是考察你的逻辑分析水平。
怎样看待GRE作文中的语言水平?
至于GRE作文的语言,其实不是很重要,只要通顺、没有语法错误就可以了,掌握了这些就可以更好地备考GRE作文。希望可以给大家一些参考,从而更好地备考GRE阅读考试。
GRE写作满分范文
Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.
At first look, this seems to be a very well presented arguement. A logical path is followed throughout the paragraph and the conclusion is expected. However, upon a second consideration, it is apparent that all possibilities were not considered when the author presented his conclusion (or at least that s/he did not present all of the possibilities). There are numerous potential explanations for why the number of accidents in Elmsford decreased while the number in Forestville increased. Although it seems logical to assume that the difference in the percentage of accidents was due to the difference in whether or not the speed limit had been increased during the specified month, this does not necessarily mean that the speed limit should be reduced back to what it originally was in Forestville. The author does not state two specific pieces of information that are important before a conclusion such as the one the author made is sound. The first is that it is not expressed whether the speed limits in the two neighboring regions had had the same speed limit before Forestville's speed limit had been increased. If they had originally been the same, then it is reasonable to conclude that Forestville's speed limit should be reduced back to what it was before the increase. However, if the two region's speed limits were initially different, then such a conclusion can not be made. The second piece of information that is necessary for the present argument is the relative number of accidents in each of the areas prior to the increase in speed limit. For the author to make the presented conclusion, the number of accidents should have been approximately equal prior to the increase in the speed limit in Forestville. If the two missing pieces of information had been presented and were in the author's favor, then the conclusion that the author made would have been much more sound than it currently is. In conclusion, the argument is not entirely well reasoned, but given the information that was expressed in the paragraph, it was presented well, and in a logical order. Comments:
This competent critique claims that there are "numerous potential explanations for why the number of accidents in Elmsford decreased while the number in Forestville increased." However, the author discusses only two points:
-- whether the speed limits in the two regions were originally the same; and
-- the number of accidents in each region prior to Forestville's raising the speed limit.
Although the response appears at first to be well developed, there is much less analysis here than the length would suggest. The first third and last third of the essay are relatively insubstantial, consisting mainly of general summary statements (e.g., "A logical path??? conclusion is expected" and "If the two??? more sound than it currently is"). The real heart of the critique consists of minimal development of the two points mentioned above. Therefore, although two important features of the argument are analyzed and the writer handles language and syntax adequately, the lack of substantial development keeps this critique from earning a score higher than 4.
GRE写作满分范文
Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour. Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent. But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period. Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.
The agrument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestville's speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.
However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit. Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely. It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford. In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas. Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area. Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.
A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area. It is mentioned in the argument that Elmsford accidents decreased during the time period. This may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. However, Forestville citizens, perhaps coerced by employment or other requirements, were unable to avoid driving on the roads. Again, the demographics of the population are important. It is possible that Elmsford citizens do not have to travel far from work or work from their home, or do not work at all. Are there more people in Forestville than there were sic months ago? If so, there may be an increased number of accidents due to more automobiles on the road, and not due to the increased speed limits. Also in reference to the activities of the population, it is possible that Forestville inhabitants were traveling during less safe times of the day, such as early in the morning, or during twilight. Work or family habits may have encouraged citizens to drive during this time when Elmsford residents may not have been forced to do so.
Overall, the reasoning behind decreasing Forestville's speed limit back to its original seems logical as presented above since the citizens are acting in their own best interests and want to protect their safety. However, before any final decisions are made about the reduction in speed limit, the citizens and officials of Forestville should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the increased number of accidents over the six-month period as compared to Elmsford. Comments:
This outstanding response begins by noting that the argument is "well presented." It then proceeds to discuss possible alternative explanations for the increase in car accidents and provides an impressively full analysis. Alternatives mentioned are that
-- the two regions might have drivers of different ages and experience; -- Forestville's topography, geography, cars, and/or roads might contribute to accidents;
-- six months might be an insufficient amount of time for determining that the speed limit is linked to the accident rate; -- demographics might play a role in auto accidents; -- population and auto density should be considered; and
-- the times of day when drivers in the two regions travel might be relevant.
The points are cogently developed and are linked in such a way as to create a logically organized critique. Transitions together with interior connections create a smoothly integrated presentation. For the most part, the writer uses language correctly and well and provides excellent variety in syntax. The minor flaws (e.g., using "less" instead of "fewer") do not detract from the overall high quality of the critique. This is an impressive 6 paper.
GRE写作相关文章:
★ GRE写作:高分冲刺
★ GRE写作:怎样准备提纲
★ GRE写作:写作论据的技巧
★ GRE背单词记不住怎么办
★ GRE写作:怎样缓解紧张
★ 组织主题夏令营活动策划方案2020
★ 夏令营特色活动策划方案
★ 夏令营实践主题活动策划方案范文
★ 有关金字塔原理读后感范文
★ 2020年开学第一课演讲稿800大学
GRE写作立论驳论文提分心得
上一篇:GRE写作4条学习经验
下一篇:GRE高分作文各段落模板