GRE寫作：高分技巧
GRE寫作那高分需要懂得這些技巧哦?今天小編給大家?guī)鞧RE寫作：高分技巧，希望能夠幫助到大家，下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。
GRE寫作：高分技巧
1. 熟練掌握新GRE寫作題庫：
為了達到公平，ETS公布了它考試的所有寫作題庫，那么為了達到能和native speaker一起競爭，考生應(yīng)該在考前對所有題目都進行預(yù)習(xí)(節(jié)約考試時的審題時間)，并通過100-150個提綱的寫作了解GRE寫作的一般結(jié)構(gòu)，通過30-50篇寫作來練習(xí)自己的寫作思路和表達。對題庫中的題目越熟練，對考試越有利。
2. 新GRE寫作迎合評卷人的評卷思路：
每個評卷人對你文章的評閱非?？?，不可能對每個細節(jié)都很仔細地去看?？忌鷳?yīng)該迎合評卷人的評卷思路，用最規(guī)范的結(jié)構(gòu)和最清晰的表達來體現(xiàn)自己的思路：首段要鮮明地提出觀點，中間段落層次要拉開，每段的開始應(yīng)該就是該段的topic sentence。
3. 新GRE寫作的評分注重三方面
首先，從ETS公布的各分數(shù)段評分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)看，其評分主要注重以下三個方面：①、邏輯分析能力(要求insightful);②、文章的組織(要求well-organized);③、語言能力(要求standard written English; concise; varied structure等)。
4. 盡量提高AI部分的寫作能力而力保AA部分滿分
由于AA的寫作不牽涉自己觀點的展開，只須指出作者邏輯上的漏洞，因此在經(jīng)過訓(xùn)練以后，寫起來并不困難;而AI的寫作需要自己展開自己設(shè)立的觀點，不但需要邏輯上的洞察能力，還需要論證觀點的能力，語言組織的能力，因此對于中國考生來講比較困難，難以短期內(nèi)有較大提高。
GRE寫作滿分范文賞析
The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state. Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland. But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue. If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage英畝數(shù),面積would probably be devoted to athletic fields. There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."
This letter to the editor begins by stating the reasons the residents of Morganton voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state. The letter states that the entire community could benefit from an undeveloped parkland. The residents of the town wanted to ensure that no shopping centers or houses would be built there. This, in turn, would provide everyone in the community with a valuable resource, a natural park.
The letter then continues by addressing the issue of building a school on the land. The author reasons that this would also benefit the entire community as a natural parkland since much of the land would be devoted to athletic fields. The author of the letter comes to the conclusion that building a school on the land would be the best thing for everyone in the community.
This letter is a one-sided argument about the best use of the land known as Scott Woods. The author may be a parent whose child would benefit from a new school, a teacher who thinks a school would boost the community, or just a resident of Morganton. Regardless of who the author is, there are many aspects of this plan that he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore.
Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland. While all the members of the community could potentially benefit from a parkland, only a percentage of the population would realistically benefit from a new school. The author fails to recognize people like the senior citizens of the community. What interest do they have in a new school? It only means higher taxes for them to pay. They will likely never to and utilize the school for anything. On the other hand, anyone can go to a park and enjoy the natural beauty and peacefulness. The use of the land for a school would destroy the benefit of a park for everyone. In turn, it would supply a school only to groups of people in exactly the right age range, not too young or too old, to reap the benefits.
Another point the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes the destruction of the park. What about children who don't play sports? Without the school, they could enjoy the land for anything. A playing field is a playing field. Children are not going to go out there unless they are into sports. There are many children in schools who are not interested in or are not able to play sports. This is yet another group who will be left out of the grand benefits of a school that the author talks about.
The author's conclusion that "there would be no better use of land in our community than this...""is easily arguable. The destruction of Scott Woods for the purpose of building a school would not only affect the ambience of Morganton, it would affect who would and would not be able to utilize the space. If the residents as a whole voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state, this argument will not sway their decision. The use of the land for a school will probably benefit even less people than a shopping center would. The whole purpose of the vote was to keep the land as an asset for everyone. The only way to do this is to keep it in an undeveloped state. Using the land for a school does not accomplish this.
Comments:
This outstanding response begins somewhat hesitantly; the opening paragraphs summarize but do not immediately engage the argument. However, the subsequent paragraphs target the central flaws in the argument and analyze them in almost microscopic detail.
The writer's main rebuttal points out that "using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for natural parkland." Several subpoints develop this critique, offering perceptive reasons to counter the argument's unsubstantiated assumptions. This is linked to a related discussion that pointedly exposes another piece of faulty reasoning: that using land for athletic fields "rationalizes the destruction of the park."
The extensively developed and organically organized analysis continues into a final paragraph that takes issue with the argument's conclusion that "there would be no better use of land in our community than this."
Diction and syntax are varied and sophisticated, and the writer is fully in control of the standard conventions. While there may be stronger papers that merit a score of 6, this response demonstrates insightful analysis, cogent development, and mastery of writing. It clearly earns a 6.
GRE寫作滿分范文賞析
"The media (books, film, music, television, for example) tend to create rather than reflect the values of a society."
The media is important and there are commercials for business reasons and news and entertainment.
For media to become mainstream, it must appeal to many people. The values expressed must be attractive to the audience, otherwise it will not sell. Example of specific media - Televison:
Television rates each show by the number of viewers. Shows that do not have a large audience are usually cancelled and then they can allow time for a new show. Successful shows are duplicated. For example, Star Trek was successful so it is the creation of many new Star Trek shows (Deep Space Nine, Voyager). Veiwers decide which shows stay or leave. What makes a successful or unsuccessful show? Usually if the audience can identify with an actor, or situation, etc. the show will gain popularity. Special effects make shows more interesting; but, if the plot is not acceptable, the show is usually doomed.
Comments:
This response does not analyze the issue. Unlike many other essays at the 1 score level, this response is fairly easy to read and has, more or less, an overall coherence. The writer's position is that media have to "appeal to many people" in order "to become mainstream," and the brief discussion supports that position. This response was scored a 1 because it does not address the basic issue presented in the topic: do the media create or reflect the values of a society?
GRE寫作：高分技巧相關(guān)文章：
★ GRE數(shù)學(xué)如何避免把簡單問題想復(fù)雜
★ 英語寫作