GRE作文提分3大主要難點和應對策略介紹
GRE作文提分3大主要難點和應對策略介紹,快來一起學習吧，分享下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。
GRE作文提分3大主要難點和應對策略介紹
GRE作文成績的重要性
新GRE作文總分為6分，在總共346分的分數(shù)構成中看似不起眼，卻是影響申請成功率的重要因素。如果能在作文中取得高分甚至滿分的成績，對于提高申請成功率有著巨大的幫助，特別是申請文科類研究生的考生，GRE作文分數(shù)的高低直接體現(xiàn)出了你對英語的掌握和綜合運用能力，是各大研究生院入學申請參考審核的重要標準。
GRE作文難點詳解
1.考試題材的廣度及深度
GRE作文考試題目涉及廣泛，遍及人文、歷史、哲學、社會學科的眾多領域，要求考生具備較寬廣的知識面及較強的材料分析能力。對于不少閉門造車，只關注考試缺乏課外閱讀量的同學來說會是一個巨大的挑戰(zhàn)。
2.邏輯分析能力要求高
GRE作文考試中這方面體現(xiàn)得尤其突出，不僅要求作文詞匯和語法的正確性，更看重考生在寫作過程中從文章框架，論述結構等多個方面體現(xiàn)出的邏輯思維和分析的能力，行文構思能力不足的考生在面對GRE寫作考試時可能會遇到不小的困難。
3. 迅速準確的分析能力
GRE作文要求在限定的時間內完成論點的提煉、論據的選擇及文案架構的設計，并最后形成論點清晰、邏輯嚴密的文章。兩篇文章總計1小時，每篇30分鐘的時間要求還是比較嚴格的，要做到又快又好的寫出一篇優(yōu)秀作文，對考生的整體寫作能力是一項考驗。
GRE作文應對策略
對于上述的這些難點，正對性的進行一些應對準備，還是會對提高分數(shù)有不小的幫助。
1. 拓寬知識面，培養(yǎng)材料分析能力
需要考生在平時不要只看題目埋頭做題，多補充一些各個領域的知識，拓寬自己的知識面，多涉獵不同的學科，進行知識的累積和儲備，在這個過程中也要隨時注意對手頭閱讀材料的分析能力的培養(yǎng)，不要看過就算，而是仔細思考其中隱含的可能考點，做好準備，養(yǎng)成勤于思考的習慣。
2. 提高邏輯分析能力
邏輯分析能力的提升不是朝夕可成的，需要一定的閱讀量和練習的積累才能逐漸提高，建議大家在平時的備考訓練過程中對于閱讀題目加強邏輯思維方面的分析工作，多總結別人的文章是怎么寫的，如何進行邏輯論證，同時也可以通過閱讀邏輯方面的書籍以及練習題來進行提高。
3. 提高寫作效率
同樣是需要大量練習的備考工作，平時寫作文時，不僅要注重文章質量，更要對練習的完成時間提出高要求，每次寫文章都按照考試要求計算時間，強迫自己適應考試的時間節(jié)奏，培養(yǎng)出高效的寫作分析能力，在平常的練習中要刻意加強快速思辨及準確表達能力的訓練，養(yǎng)成有條理、邏輯形文的習慣。
以上就是關于GRE作文難點的詳解和應對策略的介紹，希望能對大家的GRE作文備考有所幫助。
GRE Issue寫作范文詳細解析
Topic
The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine："The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."
Sample Essay
In this argument, the writer of the letter concludes that global pollution of water and air has caused a decline in the number of amphibians worldwide. To support his or her conclusion, the writer cites the results of two studies, seventy-five years apart, that purportedly show that the number of amphibians in one park in California, Yosemite National Park, have drastically declined. Additionally, the writer casts aside a given reason for the decline, stating that the introduction of trout to the park (who are known to eat amphibian eggs) does not explain the worldwide decline in the number of amphibians. This argument defies simple logic and suffers from several critical fallacies.
First of all, the argument is based on only two studies in one specific part of the world, Yosemite National Park in California. It is impossible to pinpoint a worldwide theory for the decline of amphibians based on any number of studies in only one specific location in the world - the specific varieties of amphibians, geographical conditions and other location specific variables prohibit such a sweeping generalization. One very specific location cannot be used as a model for all other locations, even within one particular country, let alone the entire world. The writer provides no evidenced whatsoever that links the Yosemite study with any purported effects anywhere else in the global environment.
Secondly, the two separate studies were done seventy-five years apart. There is no evidence that the two studies were conducted in a similar manner over the same duration of time or even over the same exact areas of Yosemite National Park, or that the exact same study methods were used. For example, perhaps the first study lasted over an entire year and was conducted by twenty-five experts in amphibious biology, resulting in the finding of seven species of amphibians in abundant numbers. By contrast, perhaps the second study was conducted over a period of one week by a lone high school student as a school science project. The writer offers no basis on which to compare the two studies, leaving it open as to whether the two are truly comparable in their breadth, scope and expertise.
Finally, the writer notes that the decline in the amphibian population has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters in 1920, but then dismisses that argument on the purely specious basis that it does not explain the worldwide decline. This part of the argument blithely dismisses the very relevant fact that trout are known to eat amphibian eggs. This attempt to "prove a negative" is the last resort of those in search of some vain attempt to prove the truth of the matter that they are asserting. It is basically impossible to "prove a negative"; this is an attempt to shift the burden of proof back on to the nonbelievers of the argument. The global environmental situation and that of Yosemite National Park are not perfectly correlated, and the fact that the trout may very well be responsible for the decline cannot simply be dismissed without further proof.
In summary, the writer fails to establish any causal relationship between global air and water pollution and the decline of amphibious life worldwide. The evidence presented is extremely weak at best and narrowly focuses on one tiny area of the globe, as well as putting forward as proof two studies about which almost nothing is known. For a stronger argument, the writer would need to directly put forth evidence associating air and water pollution with not only the decline at Yosemite but also throughout other areas of the world.(599 words)
[題目]
下述文字摘自一封致某環(huán)保雜志編輯的信函："全球兩棲動物數(shù)量的減少明顯標志著全球性水與大氣的污染。對加利福尼亞州約塞米蒂國家公園內兩棲動物所作的兩項研究可證實我的這一結論。1915年公園內有七個物種的兩棲動物，每一物種都擁有豐富的種群數(shù)量。然而，1992年，在公園內所能觀察到的兩棲動物物種僅為四類，且每一物種的種群數(shù)量已驟然下降。約塞米蒂公園動物數(shù)量減少被歸咎于始于1920年的將鮭魚引入公園水域的做法(眾所周知，鮭魚喜食兩棲動物所產的卵)。但鮭魚的引入不可能成為約塞米蒂公園動物數(shù)量減少的真正原因，因為它無法來解釋全球范圍內的動物數(shù)量減少。"
[范文正文]
在本項論述中，信函作者的結論是，全球性水與大氣污染已致使世界范圍內兩棲動物的數(shù)量減少。為了支持其論點，作者援引了兩份時隔75年之久的研究結果，這兩份結果據稱可證明加利福尼亞州某一公園――即約塞米蒂國家公園――內兩棲動物的數(shù)量銳減。此外，該作者撇開了動物數(shù)量減少的一個已知原因，陳述道，將鮭魚引入公園(據稱，鮭魚喜食兩棲動物所產的卵)這一做法不足以解釋世界范圍內兩棲動物數(shù)量上的減少。這一論點有悖于簡單的邏輯，犯有一系列關鍵性的邏輯謬誤。
首先，該論點所依據的僅僅是世界上某一特定地點――即加利福尼亞州約塞米蒂國家公園――內的兩份研究。圍繞著兩棲動物數(shù)量減少這一問題，如果僅以世界上一個特定的地點為樣品，再多數(shù)量的研究也無法得出一種精確的、適用于全世界的理論。兩棲動物的具體種類、地理狀況以及其他因地點而特異的變數(shù)均不允許我們作出如此一概而論的總括。一個非常具體的地點不能用作一個代表所有其他地點的模型，即使在一個特定的國家內也不行，更不用說在整個世界范圍內了。信函作者沒有提供任何證據將約塞米蒂公園的研究與全球環(huán)境中任何其他一處地方的任何所宣稱的效果聯(lián)系起來。 其次，所提及的那兩項互為獨立的研究時隔75年之久。沒有證據可證明這兩項研究是在相同的時間跨度內以相似的方式進行的，或是在約塞米蒂公園完全相同的地點進行的，或所使用的研究方法絕然相同。
例如，第一項研究可能持續(xù)了整整一年之久，且是由兩棲動物生物學領域的二十五位專家共同進行的。結果是發(fā)現(xiàn)了七大種類數(shù)目眾多的兩棲動物。相反，第二項研究可能是一位高中生孤身一人所做的學校的一個科學課題，僅為期一個星期。信函作者沒有提供將此兩項研究進行比較的基礎，從而使兩項研究在其廣度、范圍以及專業(yè)水準方面的可比性不得而知。 最后，信函作者指出，兩棲動物種群數(shù)量的減少，已被人歸咎于1920年將鮭魚引入公園水域這一做法，但緊接著又以該論據無法解釋世界范圍內動物數(shù)量減少這一似是而非的依據將該論據予以否認。信函作者論述中的這一部分漫不經心地將一個極為相關的事實棄置不顧，即眾所周知，鮭魚喜食兩棲動物所產的卵。這種"prove a negative "的嘗試往往是這樣一類人所慣用的最后伎倆，他們竭力尋找某種徒勞的嘗試，力圖去證明他們所宣稱的事物的真理。從根本上講，"prove a negative"是不可能的。這樣一種做法是試圖將論證的負擔重新轉嫁給不相信該論據的人。全球的環(huán)境情形與約塞米蒂公園的情形并不絕然對應。鮭魚極有可能造成了兩棲動物數(shù)量減少這一事實在缺乏進一步證據的情況下是斷不能輕易予以否認的。
概括而言，信函作者沒能在全球空氣和水污染與世界范圍內兩棲生命數(shù)量減少之間建立起任何因果關系。該作者所拿出的證據充其量也是極為蒼白無力的，狹隘地將焦點集中在世界的一片極小的區(qū)域上，作為證據而援引的兩項研究幾乎不能說明任何問題。欲使其論點更具力度，信函作者尚需擺出直接的證據，將水和空氣污染不僅僅與約塞米蒂公園的兩棲動物數(shù)量減少聯(lián)系起來，而且也與世界其他地方的動物數(shù)量減少聯(lián)系起來。
上文的內容非常詳細，大家要好好利用它們，切忌生搬硬套，祝大家考出好成績。
GRE優(yōu)秀作文范例參考
正文：
Nowadays there is a growing concern about the role that innovations have played in the field of learning. While most people think that innovations benefit learning process in various ways，different opinions arise that these technology advancements actually distract students from real learning. On balance，according to my personal observation,whether innovations can be beneficial or detrimental to real learning depends on the students and the teachers，not on these innovations themselves.
To begin with，technological innovations do help teaching and learning in various ways.With the aid of these technologies，the process of teaching and learning can be shorter and easier than before. For instance，if a student want certain published papers of an academic discipline，he/she may look through considerable catalogs to find the ones he/she needs. However，with the help of Internet innovation，at present most of these papers are published online. Consequently，to find certain paper the procedure is much easier and shorter，the students just type the key words and other information of the paper，and then the system will search the database，and the papers are there waiting for them. As this new approach can save a lot of time for the students，he/she could have more time reading the papers and absorbing the knowledge rather than checking and looking for the papers that could be a waste of his/her time. This example aptly illustrates how technology advancement benefited the students and their learning process.
Secondly，while innovations can help learning in various ways，it is more important that the central role of the pursuit for knowledge and wisdoms are maintained. What real matters is not the approach but the purpose of learning. In India，where modern technologies are less applied to the learning process than in the US and other developed countries，still a lot of distinguished students achieved their academic goal with their hard work and desires to knowledge. In the US，where the software engineering students are given the most advanced facilities and apparatus for their learning and research，however，it is wildly accepted that they are far less outstanding compared to the Indian students of software，who may share computers in groups. From this comparison we can see that the real and core push of learning is the desire for knowledge，not the help of innovations.
In addition，if not guided properly，the technology advancement might inhibit learning.In other words，innovation can distract the students from real learning than helping them. It is obvious that a computer can help students of science to calculate mathematical equations but can also be used for recreation such as net surfing or computer games. It is highly possible that these students can spend more time and energy on recreations rather than learning when using a computer. Thus，learning is inhibited. Under this circumstance，guidance and restrictions are needed to ensure the right use of innovations for learning，or the consequence may be on the contrary to the students and teachers' desire.
To conclude，technological innovations are beneficial to learning in many ways，but when using these technologies，one should not forget the real purpose of learning and remember not to be distracted for other usages of these innovations that are irrelevant or detrimental to learning. On balance，innovation here serves as a double-edges sword，and its right use is dependent on the students and the teachers.
GRE作文提分3大主要難點和應對策略介紹相關文章：
