GRE寫作：正確對待的模板

千里之行，始于第2頁/共2頁精品文檔推薦GRE寫作：正確對待的模板如何正確對待GRE寫作模板?今日我給大家?guī)鞧RE寫作之正確對待的模板，盼望能夠關(guān)心到大家，下面我就和大家共享，來觀賞一下吧。

GRE寫作：正確對待的模板

(1)早點(diǎn)整理出自己的模板，什么是模板，應(yīng)當(dāng)怎么預(yù)備，會在下面的部分為G親們說明，所以不用焦急。

(2)考試的時(shí)候挨次把握好，先讀題，形成思路和粗略提綱敲首段，中間每段的主旨句和過渡段，最終敲尾段，依據(jù)時(shí)間，有層次地補(bǔ)充豐滿每段的內(nèi)容檢查拼寫語法錯(cuò)誤，平常練習(xí)的時(shí)候就是不斷地重復(fù)這樣的挨次，做到特別熟識。

(3)狂寫，練打字速度，尤其是練自己的模板、固定段落、常用事例的打字速度。當(dāng)時(shí)用Issue部分的時(shí)間就可以把Issue和Argu全部寫完，Issue上600，Argu上550;平常正常寫的話，Issue可以上700，Argu上600，靠的就是固定段落、事例還有模板的打字特殊快，基本上Issue模板250字在幾分鐘之內(nèi)就搞定了，Argu的模板就更夸張了，總共才500多字，模板就有一大半，而且基本上幾分鐘之內(nèi)就可以完全打完。

在備考新GRE作文的過程中，其實(shí)是否預(yù)備網(wǎng)絡(luò)流傳的“高頻”題目并不重要，而重要的是，無論預(yù)備什么題目，都能有正確的思索路徑和分析方法，并且能夠用正確的語言來表達(dá)自己的想法。

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Thefollowingappearedasalettertotheeditorofalocalnewspaper.

Fiveyearsago,weresidentsofMorgantonvotedtokeepthepubliclyownedpieceoflandknownasScottWoodsinanatural,undevelopedstate.Ourthinkingwasthat,ifnoshoppingcentersorhouseswerebuiltthere,ScottWoodswouldcontinuetobenefitourcommunityasanaturalparkland.Butnowthatourtownplanningcommitteewantstopurchasethelandandbuildaschoolthere,weshouldreconsiderthisissue.Ifthelandbecomesaschoolsite,noshoppingcentersorhousescanbebuiltthere,andsubstantialacreagewouldprobablybedevotedtoathleticfields.Therewouldbenobetteruseoflandinourcommunitythanthis,sincealargemajorityofourchildrenparticipateinsports,andScottWoodswouldcontinuetobenefitourcommunityasnaturalparkland.

TheargumentaboutScottWoodsbeingundevelopedlandseemtobeawellthoughtout.Thecommunityhasthoughtlongandhardaboutwhattheywantedtodowiththeland.Theydonotwantanyhomesorshoppingmallsonthelandbecauseitwouldnotbenefitthecommunityasanaturalparkland.Bybuildingtheschoolonthevacantlandisnotbenfitingthecommunityasnaturalparklandeither.Therewouldbethesametypeofconstructionandtraffic.Thatisverycontradictoryinitself.Ithinkthatthecommunitywouldhavetomeetagainanddecideexactlywasisbestforthisparticularcommunityandthechildreninthecommunity.Thepresentationsoundedsocloseandshutaboutwhatwasgoingtobedoneaboutthelandthatitseemeduslessforanybodytotrytopurchaseitanddoanythingwiththeland.SoiftheMorgantoncommunitywantsomethingsuchasaschoolbeingbuiltonthelandthatshouldhavebeenwhattheyvotedoninthefirstplace.Theylookveryindecisiveandevencontrolling.Thesearenotverygoodwaystoaccomplishordobusiness.

Comments:

Theopeningsentencesofthislimitedresponseseemtoagreewiththeargument,describingitaswellthoughtout.However,thewriterbeginstoconstructacritiqueinthefourthsentence,identifyingandbrieflydescribingoneflawedassumption:ifthecommunitymemberswanttoretainnaturalparkland,theywillnotbeabletodosobybuildingaschoolonthatland.

Thisistheonlyanalysisintheresponse,markingitasplainlyflawed.Theremainingfivesentencesfailtodeveloporaddtothiscritique.Somearetangential(Ithinkthatthecommunitywouldhavetomeetagain???)andothersareirrelevant(Theylookveryindecisiveandevencontrolling).

Thewritingdemonstrateslimitedlanguagecontrol.Therearemissingwords,syntaxerrors,andseveralgrammaticalerrors.Forthesereasons,theessayearnsthescoreof3.

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Thefollowingappearedasalettertotheeditorofalocalnewspaper.

Fiveyearsago,weresidentsofMorgantonvotedtokeepthepubliclyownedpieceoflandknownasScottWoodsinanatural,undevelopedstate.Ourthinkingwasthat,ifnoshoppingcentersorhouseswerebuiltthere,ScottWoodswouldcontinuetobenefitourcommunityasanaturalparkland.Butnowthatourtownplanningcommitteewantstopurchasethelandandbuildaschoolthere,weshouldreconsiderthisissue.Ifthelandbecomesaschoolsite,noshoppingcentersorhousescanbebuiltthere,andsubstantialacreagewouldprobablybedevotedtoathleticfields.Therewouldbenobetteruseoflandinourcommunitythanthis,sincealargemajorityofourchildrenparticipateinsports,andScottWoodswouldcontinuetobenefitourcommunityasnaturalparkland.

Theargumentthatthewriteristryingtomakecontainsseveralflaws.Firstofall,thewriterneedstobeclearonwhetherornotheorshewishestokeepScottWoodsinanatural,undevelopedstate.TobenaturalandundevelopedsuggestthatScottWoodsisfreefromanythingman-made.Ithasnotbeeninfectedwithman-madebuildingsofanykind.TheauthorsuggeststhatthebuildingofaschoolinScootWoodswouldpreserveMorgantonsnaturalparklandbypreventingtheconstructionofshoppingcentersandhouses.Yet,thebuildingofaschoolwouldpreventMorgantonfrompreservingthisnaturalparklandjustasshoppingcentersandhouses.Whiletheschoolmayprovidesubstantialacreageforathleticfields,itwouldbestillcontributingtopollution,thelossofvegetationandoveralldisruptiontothenaturalecosystemofScottWoods.Consequently,theareawouldnotbeanaturalparklandastheauthorsuggests.

Furthermore,theauthorappealstothesensitivityofthereadersthroughhisdiscussiononthechildrensparticipationinsports.Hefalselystatesthatthethechildrensuseoftheathleticfieldsthattheschoolwouldprovideisthebestwaytoutilizethisnaturalparkland.Again,theauthormistakinglyfeelsthatathleticfieldsconstituteanaturalparkland.Sincetheauthorcontinuouslymisusesthewordnaturalparkland,thevalidityoftheletterisweakened.

Comments:

Afteracknowledgingthattheargumentcontainsseveralflaws,thisadequateresponseidentifiesabasicprobleminthereasoning--theletterwritersambivalenceaboutthedesirabilityofmaintainingScottWoodsasnaturalandundevelopedparkland.Thewriterrecognizesthattheargumentsconfusedintentionsareindirectlyrelatedtoarootflawintheargument:theassumptionthatconstructionofnewbuildings--evenschoolbuildings--wouldnotimpactthepreservationoftheparkland.Further,thewriterdoesacompetentjobofexplaininghowbothoftheseproblemsaretheresultofalackofclarityaboutwhatconstitutesanaturalparkland.

Paragraph2identifiesanadditionalweaknessintheargument;thewriterrefusestobet