淺談寫作教學經驗

———淺談寫作教學經驗“杜冷33丁”投稿了13篇淺談寫作教學經驗，以下是我為大家整理后的淺談寫作教學經驗，希望對您有所幫忙。篇11：托福寫作高分經驗篇12：托福寫作高分經驗篇13：GRE寫作高分經驗GRE寫作高分經驗共享立論駁論文提分心得不行不看以下就是我本身總結一點小技巧：首先，我在準備GRE寫作備考時，最緊要的一個步驟在于熟識題庫和認真準備提綱。GRE立論文issue經驗共享對于立論文（Issue）說，我覺得本身動手擬一份提綱是特別有用的，你可以參考各種資料，但必需勤動腦，想一想提綱的邏輯連續(xù)性。實際上，有偏向性、但又不要肯定化的思路才是最易上手的。GRE駁論文argument怎么練？對于駁論文（Argument）而言，我認為熟識題庫更為緊要。正常情況下是這樣的，但確實有些難題若不事先好好準備，五分鐘之內能找出兩個錯誤就不錯了。在第一次考試時，我正是由于在準備時放掉了一道我只找出兩個錯誤的題目，而在正式考試時恰恰遇到了這道題目，所以寫得很不好。寫駁論文有很多小竅門，如需要磨練出區(qū)別“事實”和“觀點”的本領，無論題目中所給的事實有多夸張都需認為它是對的，不能攻擊，只能攻擊觀點中的邏輯漏洞；凡是跟統(tǒng)計數(shù)字、統(tǒng)計方法有關的邏輯錯誤都盡量不要攻擊，最多只能一筆帶過等等。GRE作文邏輯緊要嗎？雖然邏輯作文滿分只有6分，可千萬別小看了它的緊要性。從某種程度上來說，它是GRE的精華——由于GRE考的就是邏輯，用英語寫兩篇作文只是形式而已，重要目的就是考察你的邏輯分析水平。怎樣看待GRE作文中的語言水平？至于GRE作文的語言，其實不是很緊要，只要通順、沒有語法錯誤就可以了，掌握了這些就可以更好地備考GRE作文。希望可以給大家一些參考，從而更好地備考GRE閱讀考試。新GRE寫作：審查的公正性題目：Censorshipisrarely,ifever,justified.審查很少能夠做到公正。范文：“Censorship”isawordwhichseemstobeauthoritativeratherthandemocratic,whichimpliesthewillofthegovernorsratherthanthewillofgeneralpeople.Sincetheoccurrenceofthecensorship,whichcouldbetracedbacktotheAncientRome,ithasbeenplayinganimportantpartinthedomesticaffairswhiletoarouseapplauseandcondemnationaswell.Heretheourgovernmentfacesadilemma,isitfairtocarryonthecensorshipatthecostofsacrificingpartofdemocracy,orjustopenthegatelettingflowsofideasandthoughtsin,attheriskoflosingitsownrampart.Sincecensorshipsuggestanactofchangingorsuppressingspeech,writingoranyotherformsofexpressionthatiscondemnedassubversiveofthecommongood,itmusthaveacloserelationshipwiththeonewhoappliessuchsupervision,andtheword“commongood”shouldberedefinedunderdifferentconditions.Thereistimewhenwewereallunderapowerfulmonarchy,andthe“commongood”isthe“monarchgood”,thenthecensorshipitselfistheinstrumentofthemonarchwhichsolelydependedonthewillofthemonarch；intheMiddleAges,boththeRomanCatholicandtheProtestantChurchespracticedcensorshipthatseemedtobeoppressivetoanyideaschallengingthedoctrinesofchurchesandtheexistenceofGod；evennow,insomeauthoritativecountries,thecensorshipisusedtoruleitspeoplebyrestrictingtheirminds,ofcourse,forthestabilityoftheirgoverningoverthepeople.Withtheseregards,censorshipitselfisquestionedattherationalityofexisting,regardlessofthepracticesmadebythedemocraticgovernment,whilethejusticeofthedemocraticgovernmentisquitedoubtable.Thematterconcerningisnotonlywhopracticesthecensorshipbutalsohowitispracticed.Sincedifferentmenmakedifferentcommentsonthesameworkofart,forexample,itishardtosetupameasurebywhichwecoulddecidewhetheroneshouldbeprohibited,especiallytotheworkofarts,asitscontentalwayslabeledas“subversive”and“revolutionary”,twowordsdetestedbythegovernorsmost.SuchcasescouldbefoundinUlyssesbyJ.JoyceandLadyChatterleysLoverbyD.HLawrence,thesetwogreatnovelswerefirstlyconsideredtobeguiltyofobscenityandwereputtoprohibitionbytheAmericangovernment,butturnedouttobetruemasterpiecestoday.Soanyformofcensorship,tosomeextent,lagsbehindthedevelopmentofideasandwillputmoreorlessanegativeeffectontheirdevelopment.Thoughthecensorshipissuchadisgustingwordembodyingsomuchoppressionandmight,itisacompromisewemadewiththerealityfarfrombeingperfect,toprovideacomparativestablegroundwhichwecouldstandon.Atthispoint,IdontagreewiththeinstitutelikeACLUwhoopposeanycensorship.Thecensorship,thoughrarelyjustified,shouldexistaslongasamoreidealandpracticalformisfoundtoreplaceit,orwecouldonlyexpectourGodtocreateamoreidealspeciesinsteadofimperfecthumanbeings.新GRE寫作：權威問題題目：Muchoftheinformationthatpeopleassumeisfactualactuallyturnsouttobeinaccurate.Thus,anypieceofinformationreferredtoasafactshouldbemistrustedsinceitmaywellbeprovenfalseinthefuture.大多數(shù)人們認為是事實的信息結果實際上都是不準確的。因此，任何據(jù)稱是事實的信息都應當被質疑，由于它在將來很可能會被證明為是錯誤的。范文：Shouldwebedoubtfultoalltheinformationathandsbecausetherightnessofwhichisuncertain？Thespeakerclaimsso,Iconcedethatpeopleoftencommitvariousfallaciesinthecourseofcognizingthings,howeverIfundamentallytakeexceptionofthearguersassertiontomistrusteveryfactwemightencounter.AndIwillsubstantiallydiscussmyviewsthereinafter.Tobeginwith,thespeakerseemstoimplicatethatafactwouldbeprovenfalseinthefutureundernumerouscircumstance.NeverthelessIprefertoarguethatfactsneverchange.NomatterhowdidtheMedievalChurchandInquisitionpersecuteBruno,thefactneverchangesthattheearthisfarfrombeingthecenteroftheuniverseasthereligioussovereignshadassumedorhopedfor,whilejustaminorparticleinit.Equally,nomatterhowEdisonhadtriedtoincitethepublicfearanddistrusttothealternativecurrentelectricity,thefactneverchangesthatTealselectricalsystemisvastlysuperiortohisdirectcurrentelectricalone,andwouldbeacceptedandappliedinlargerrange.However,whatdochangearethehumansobjectiveinterpretationstofacts.Onecompellingargumenttothispointisthat,duetothelimitationofhumansknowledgeandcomprehensivecapability,theytendtomakeinsufficientorevenfalseunderstandingtothecertainfact.Anaptillustrationisthechangesofcognitiontodisease.Whileattheancienttime,ourprogenitorsbelievedtheamanbecomingapatientforthereasonthathehadconductcrimesoroffendedsomeghostsorspirits,thecontemporarypeoplehavewellknowthatthevariesofpathogensarethebasiccausestoourdiseases,andthedefectsofourimmunesystemandsofortharealsothefactorsaswell.Anotherargumentforthechangeofcomprehensiontofactisthatdifferentpeoplealwaysobserveandinterpretfromdifferentperspectives.ThoughtheRelativitytheoryisnotwellcompliablewiththeQuantummechanism,noonecallthegreatnessofbothEinsteinandBohr,becausetheirtheoriesarebasedondistinctviews,theformerfromthemacrocosmandthelaterfromthemicrocosm.Notwithstandingtheforegoingreasonsforthathumantendtomakefallaciesduringthecauseofcomprehendingandcognizingfacts,thesereasonsshouldneverbetheexcusestodoubteveryconclusionwemightdrawfromfacts.Basedoncertainrationalinferenceandproperknowledgefundament,theconclusionswemakemightwellbejustifiable,ifnotcompletelyright,tocertaindegree.Whatweneedtodoistopromotetheenterpriseofpursuingthebetteranswerandtrytousetheresultwehavegettoapplication,insteadofwastingourtimetounduedoubtandsuspicion.Thoughthemedicalscientistshavenotfullyunderstoodth