GRE寫作思路名師解析

GRE寫作思路名師解析，快來一起學(xué)習(xí)吧，分享下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。

GRE寫作思路名師解析

大體上來說，同學(xué)們在GRE作文中邏輯問題是最多的。邏輯問題有三種，通篇邏輯，段落之間，段落之中。

要記住一點，GRE文章是一個整體，你的開篇結(jié)尾和中部內(nèi)容都是應(yīng)該有關(guān)聯(lián)的。也就是說，在開頭提到的，文中應(yīng)該有展開，同時在結(jié)尾有總結(jié)。中文里不也要求行文流暢么，這至少得要求邏輯是通順的。

很多同學(xué)都很喜歡寫中立觀點“A不錯，但不夠好”，這雖然看起來很客觀，但實際上對邏輯的要求非常高，要怎樣去組織語言，組織相應(yīng)的論據(jù)論點，非常考驗人。

有同學(xué)想說A事件要瑕疵互見，但是寫著寫著就亂七八糟，東一塊西一塊，不知道在講點什么了。更有厲害的索性冗長的2000來詞，講了個空話。所以建議剛上手的同學(xué)，還是選擇一邊倒，站定腳跟不放松。即便是真的要寫中立觀點，實際上也都在A和B之間有所偏好。

此外，現(xiàn)在很多人會要求練writing的時候先寫提綱。于是同學(xué)們們就只寫一個觀點，然后后面的例子亂用，或者根本沒有弄清楚什么是例子。事實上，這種展開，可以是實例，也可以是虛擬的假設(shè)。實例中往往分自己的經(jīng)驗和他人的經(jīng)驗。那么怎樣的例子有說服力呢?

一般來說是：名人名事(知名度大)> 眾人眾事(樣本大)>自己經(jīng)歷(體會深)>他人經(jīng)歷。假設(shè)往往不夠有說服力，因為很難涉及到每一個變量。但是假設(shè)在有的時候可以行得通，就是在很難說清楚步驟和因果關(guān)系的時候，用一個假設(shè)場景來推導(dǎo)會讓文章變得淺顯易懂。

所以建議，在剛開始上手寫toefl作文的時候，先不要給自己30分鐘的壓力，先列出提綱(10分鐘)，再用30分鐘去寫，看能寫多少。

記住你的舉例一定要死死扣住你的觀點，不要是和觀點打擦邊球的。比如我改過之前一個小朋友的文章，她的大觀點是電腦對學(xué)生來說是有益的，小觀點是，可以查到很多資料，然后例子是可以用google查到很多資料，很快捷。

ok，乍一看這個沒有問題。但是實際上問題大了，用goole查到很多資料，是因為電腦還是internet?這很容易就偏題了，變成 internet對學(xué)生來說是有益的。例子一定要從論點出發(fā)，再回到論點。不要將你的論點發(fā)散，后果很可能就是越寫越跑題。所以每次寫好一篇文章，都看看，論據(jù)里的key words是不是和論點里的key words 一樣，論點里的key words又是不是和題目里的key words一樣。你的key words 可以比大題里的key words更加narrow，但是千萬不要更加廣泛。

最后說的邏輯錯誤，是段落中邏輯比較容易錯的。一般是對接續(xù)詞的運用。如However, thus, therefore，他們決定了上下文之間的關(guān)系，但是很多讀起來就很奇怪，兩者完全不是轉(zhuǎn)折的關(guān)系，用了however，就會讓人覺得有些無厘頭。

或者就是上下文之間完全沒有邏輯聯(lián)系，就是兩個單句湊在了一起。還是這句話，一篇文章和流水似的，不能斷。中間斷了那就不叫好文章了。即使前一句與有一句沒有接續(xù)詞，它們在邏輯上也是要能承接的。

GRE考試作文：丑聞

Scandals-whether in politics， academia， or other areas-can be useful.They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.

丑聞――無論是政治、學(xué)術(shù)還是其他領(lǐng)域――可能會是有用的。丑聞可以用演說家或者改革家無法使用的手段讓我們注意到某些問題。

GRE寫作范文：

Scandals occur in nearly every field that human set foot in， both revealed and incubative.Once people recognize that the person they adored yesterday is actually a liar by the exposednesses of his scandal， the first reaction may be anger， sorrow and depression.However， if rational rethinking and remediation have been taken after the reports of scandals， actually greater progresses can always be achieved compared with the efforts made by the daily boring speeches made by speakers and reformers.

Scandals can clearly show us the hidden unreasonable and unjust regulations， therefore administers or the public can adjust or even correct those errors. After the Watergate Event， not only President Nixon lost his job， but further influence was conducted by the public and medium. They realized that the problem of the abuse of power which was neglected in the past. As a result， a closer scrutiny upon the high officials of government prevents them from abusing their power any longer. Recently， the filthy relationship between Juventus Club and several references was publicized by medium， which shocked the football circle by those large holes in the institutions of football league and thus forced the Italia Football Association to take actions towards Juventus， references and the ill institutions. While Juventus has been deprived the former championship， a series of more appropriate regulations have at last been added into the football systems. There is no denying that those scandals indeed prohibit the daily operations and developments of certain fields to some extent， but these deleterious effects can be temporary， if proper measures have been done immediately. In this case， scandals may become stimulations that can provoke the awareness of the emergency of the scandals， which is necessary for establishment of an ultimate solutions to the present problems.

Furthermore， compared with the accomplishments endowed by the professional speakers and reformers， the progresses made by the aftereffects of scandals are often more significant and fast. A scandal maker usually has his position in high status， which grants him power great enough to make his underground and illegal behavior so harmful and astonishing that it can be called a scandal. Before their scandals have been known to the public， they are generally admired and trusted by their superiors and inferiors， as well as the medium and public. Therefore， it is difficult or even impossible for speakers and reformers to win the battle against those scandal makers and their inequitable laws or regulations without the support of anyone. No one believes or even pays attention on whatever the speakers and reformers assert， if the scandal makers are trying to cover up those events by their power and trust they gained at the same time. Consequently those errors remain forever. Once the secrets of the scandal makers give away， however， their aura fades， legends evaporate， so does the trust and power endued. Under such circumstances that all sides feel unsatisfied and disappointed， it is much easier for reformers to draw the focus on their ameliorative allegations towards the long existed problems， and thus， the improvements can be made. Perhaps it may be strange to accept the ironic conclusion that scandals do play a more vital role in healing the morbid system of a certain realm than those reformers do sometimes， but oftentimes it is scandal that helps the reformers a lot to strike their targets， which leads to a future primary achievements for society.

Despite the forgoing contributions of scandals， they are not without its apparent problems. Hypersensitive worries may lead serious disorders or even disasters. A threshold trouble is about the excessive revealment of privacies of the officials， stars， or other persons who were doubted to have scandals. This was often done by some so-called responsible mediums in the name of observation the social problems. As a result， the bothered officials or the stars can hardly utilize their full abilities to fulfill their tasks or jobs. Just to meet the curiosity of the public so that they can bolster their sales and profits， these mediums' detective behaviors will inevitably bring about disorders to those who in charge in some areas. Secondly， overstatements of the grave effects of scandals may shadow the contributions of the scandal makers unfairly. Although Clinton was accused by his rose event， his dedication towards the resuscitation and prosperity of America's economy during his term of office cannot be denied. If his fault was overemphasized present， he may have to resign immediately， and his economic ability can no longer serve the society，which is an obvious loss of the society.

To be just， I acknowledge that most people hate to witness scandals happening around them. What is more， recessions and the private violations always come along with scandals.Nevertheless， seeing from another angle， if the scandals are in fact ineluctable， it may be wiser to bravely face with the extant problems. We should find them out and then correct them rather than simply denying their existence.

GRE寫作官方題庫高頻ARGUMENT題目滿分范文分享：student evaluation of professors

GRE作文官方題庫ARGUMENT題目：

The following appeared in a memorandum from a dean at Omega University.

“Fifteen years ago, Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors. Since that time, Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes, and overall student grade averages at Omega have risen by thirty percent. Potential employers apparently believe the grades at Omega are inflated; this would explain why Omega graduates have not been as successful at getting jobs as have graduates from nearby Alpha University. To enable its graduates to secure better jobs, Omega University should now terminate student evaluation of professors.”

【滿分范文賞析】

In this memo Omega University’s dean points out that Omega graduates are less successful in getting jobs than Alpha University graduates, despite the fact that during the past 15 years the overall grade average of Omega students has risen by 30%. The dean indicates that during the past 15 years Omega has encouraged its studentsto evaluate the effectiveness of their professors. The dean reasons that student evaluations led professors to increase grades, which has, in turn, created a perception among employers that the grades of Omega graduates are not actually representative of their real quality. The dean concludes that to enable Omega graduates enjoy better job placement, the university must terminate its professor-evaluation procedure. This argument is unconvincing because it contains several flaws in logic.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument開頭段結(jié)構(gòu)，即C—E—F的開頭結(jié)構(gòu)。段落首先概括原文的Conclusion，接下來概括原文為支持其結(jié)論所引用的一系列evidence，最后給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文在邏輯上含有多處Flaw。

【本段功能】本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在于發(fā)起攻擊并概括原文的結(jié)論，即：為了讓其畢業(yè)生獲得更好的工作，Omega大學(xué)應(yīng)該現(xiàn)在停止學(xué)生評估教授的程序。本段分布列舉了原文為支持其結(jié)論所引用的證據(jù)——盡管在過去15年內(nèi)Omega學(xué)生的總平均成績提高了30%，Omega大學(xué)的畢業(yè)生在就業(yè)時不如Alpha大學(xué)的畢業(yè)生成功、學(xué)生對教授的評估導(dǎo)致教授提高成績，進而使雇主們產(chǎn)生Omega畢業(yè)生的成績不能代表他們的真實品質(zhì)這一印象等等。這些信息的歸納為正文段中即將進行的具體攻擊作鋪墊。

One problem with the argument is that the current evaluation process is not a mandatory one and the deandoesn’t state how many people participated. The dean provides no evidence about the number of students or percentage of the study body who participate in the procedure. Without such evidence,drawing a link between the evaluation of professors and their grading trends is not possible. Without such a link, an audience cannot be expected to accept that the termination of the above-mentioned evaluation would, in fact, have any effect on grading.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第一個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【本段功能】本段作為正文第一段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第一個重要邏輯錯誤——調(diào)查類錯誤。本段指出學(xué)?，F(xiàn)有的評估過程不是強制性的，院長也沒有說明有多少人參與了調(diào)查。院長沒有對參與這一程序的學(xué)生人數(shù)或在學(xué)生群體中所占的百分比提供證據(jù)。如果沒有這樣的證據(jù)，是不可能建立學(xué)生對教授的評估和教授的評分趨勢之間的聯(lián)系的。如果沒有如此聯(lián)系，不能指望觀眾接受學(xué)生對教授的評估的終止將對教授的評分產(chǎn)生任何影響這一論斷。

The argument is based on the assumption that the grade-average increase is somehow related to the evaluation procedurerather than some other phenomenon. The dean ignores a host of other possible explanations for the increase. For example, a trend at Omega toward higher admission standards, or higher quality instruction or facilities could have produced the increased grades. Without ruling out this or other possible explanations for the grade-average increase, the dean cannot expect to convince an audience that by terminating the evaluation procedure Omega would curb its perceived grade inflation, let alone help its graduates get jobs.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第二個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【本段功能】本段作為正文第二段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第二個重要邏輯錯誤——忽略他因。原文假設(shè)平均成績的提升是以某種方式和評估的程序而不是某種其它的現(xiàn)象聯(lián)系起來的。院長忽視了諸多于這一成績提升的其它可能解釋。例如，Omega錄取學(xué)生標(biāo)準(zhǔn)提高的趨勢或高質(zhì)量的教學(xué)和設(shè)施均可能導(dǎo)致了成績的提升。本段最后指出：院長在沒有排除這些其它可能導(dǎo)致平均成績提升的解釋之前，是不能指望說服觀眾Omega大學(xué)停止其評估程序?qū)⒁种破涑煽兺?，更不用提將幫助其畢業(yè)生找到工作了。

Even if the evaluation procedure has resulted in grade inflation at Omega, the dean’s claim that grade inflation explains why Omega graduates are less successful than Alpha graduates in getting jobs is unjustified. The dean overlooks a myriad of other possible reasons for Omega’s comparatively poor job-placement record. Perhaps Omega’s career services are inadequate.Perhaps Omega’s curriculum does not prepare students for the job market as effectively as Alpha’s. In short, without the true results of a comparative analysis, there is no way we can determine that this is why graduates have been less successfully placed.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第三個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【本段功能】本段作為正文第三段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第三個重要邏輯錯誤——忽略他因。即使評估程序?qū)е铝薕mega學(xué)生的成績通脹，院長關(guān)于為什么Omega的畢業(yè)生在就業(yè)時沒有Alpha的畢業(yè)生成功的論斷也不能被證明正確。院長忽視了種.種其它可能導(dǎo)致Omega就業(yè)情況記錄較差的原因?；蛟SOmega的職業(yè)服務(wù)不適當(dāng)，或許Omega的課程不能像Alpha的課程那樣有效地為學(xué)生們的就業(yè)做準(zhǔn)備。本段最后指出：如果沒有一個比較分析的真實結(jié)果，我們無從決定這就是畢業(yè)生就業(yè)并不成功的理由。

Even if the dean can prove the assumptions, his assertion that Omega must terminate its evaluation procedure to enable its graduates to find better jobs is still unwarranted. First, the dean ignores other ways that Omega could potentially increase its job-placement record. For example, by improving its public relations or career-counseling services, the university may be able to gain a better reputation and deliver better potential employees. Second, the dean seems to equate “more” jobs with “better” jobs—there is no analysis of the jobs that Alpha graduates were placed in. In other words, even if more Omega graduates were able to find jobs as a result of the dean’s recommended course of action, the kinds of jobs Omega graduates find would not necessarily be better ones.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第四個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

【本段功能】本段作為正文第四段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第四個重要邏輯錯誤——因果類錯誤。即使院長能夠證實前述假設(shè)，他關(guān)于Omega必須停止其評估程序以使其畢業(yè)生找到更好的工作的斷言依然是無根據(jù)的。首先，院長忽視了Omega可以潛在地提高其就業(yè)記錄的方式，例如改善其公共關(guān)系或職業(yè)咨詢服務(wù)等。其次，院長似乎將“更多的”工作和“更好的”工作劃等號，也沒有對Alpha的畢業(yè)生所處的工作進行分析。換而言之，即使院長所建議的行動促使更多的Omega畢業(yè)生能夠找到工作，他們所找到的工作的種類也并不一定是更好的。

GRE寫作思路名師解析相關(guān)文章：