解析GRE考试写作复习
“苹果肌富翁”通过精心收集，向本站投稿了6篇解析GRE考试写作复习，以下是小编为大家准备的解析GRE考试写作复习，欢迎大家前来参阅。
篇1：解析GRE考试写作复习
解析GRE考试写作复习
1)新GRE作文的基本情况：
新GRE写作要求考生在30分钟+30分钟内分别完成两篇文章，它是美国所有作文考试中时间最长而质量要求最高的一类作文考试。此外，GRE考试作文不仅是普林斯顿的教授给个分就算，它还要我们花钱将其寄到我们申请的学校，然后由这帮决定我们命运的委员会的委员们严格把关，看你是否在科研文章的写作方面具备一定的水准，因为你们将来的老板对写作的要求是比较高的，所以这自然是构成了你能不能得到奖学金的重要标准之一。
当然大家也不要怕，新GRE写作的题目是全世界公开的，有点像我们的开卷考试，只要花一定的精力准备，再加上临危不惧的心态，一般的中国考生基本都能考到4.5分以上，所以请大家在准备新GRE写作的第一天开始就要具备这种必胜的心态。天道六步曲体系 TSSS源于经验、责任、使命、灵感和天才，充分凝聚每一个天道人的智慧以及数千个名校成功录取案例的经验。天道引进世界顶级咨询公司先进咨询服务模型和西方职业评估体系基础上，结合申请人在海外求学路上的切实困惑和需求，开创出来的全新留学服务体系。“天道六步曲”的宗旨是打破传统留学中介代理的服务模式，关注就业，重视科学职业规划，强调授人以“渔”。协助申请人创建自己从未意识到的申请名校的竞争优势(Create your own edge)。天道旨在成为中国留学行业的改革者和新规则的制定者。我们要破除已有的习惯性思维，推行同样的变革和创新。
2)新GRE作文从特点上论述：
1. 新GRE写作考试有练习题：
为了达到公平，公布了它考试的所有写作练习题，那么为了达到能和native speaker一起竞争，考生应该在考前对所有题目都进行预习(节约考试时的审题时间)，并通过100-150个提纲的写作了解新GRE写作的一般结构，通过30-50篇写作来练习自己的写作思路和表达。对练习题中的题目越熟练，对考试越有利。
2. 新GRE写作考试的评阅是计件工作制的：
每个评卷人对你文章的评阅非常快，不可能对每个细节都很仔细地去看。考生应该迎合评卷人的评卷思路，用最规范的结构和最清晰的表达来体现自己的思路：首段要鲜明地提出观点，中间段落层次要拉开，每段的开始应该就是该段的topic sentence。
3. 新GRE写作的评分是整体评分(holistic scoring)：
首先，从公布的各分数段评分标准看，其评分主要注重以下三个方面：
①逻辑分析能力，要求insightful;
②文章的组织，要求well-organized;
③语言能力，要求standard written English; concise; varied structure等。
但是也强调，评分是整体的，而不是各个角度分别评分。这就说明，虽然中国考生的语言能力偏弱，但是只要能在其他两个角度上给评卷人非常impressive的感觉，一样可以拿到6分。
因此，在短期内尽力提高语言能力的同时(语言能力的培养不是一天两天可以完成的)，考生在复习时应该尽可能地对题目进行深入的分析，学习高分作文的文章结构，通过这两个方面的突破来迅速提高作文整体的分数。
当然，练习这么多的文章需要考生付出相当大的代价。大部分考生都没有这么充裕的时间。一般来说，针对不同类型的Issue题目，要练习50篇左右。
如Argument。Argument练习题内容虽然很大，但就题目中出错的逻辑类型来说，就显得较为单一了。
比如：第2题---由于Brookville采用了景观限制措施，我们Deerhaven Ares也应采用。 第16题---邻省Lucria开设了彩票业务，我们Impecunia也应效仿。第18题---改良了道路并维持55mph的速度限制，我们Prunty County也应保持55mph的速度限制。
再如：第8题---Mesa Food的食品在一个小地区获得了成功，我们在全国范围内推广其产品的销售。第19题---Ad Lib在Megalopolis推销摇滚乐队的演出门票很成功，因此在全国的巡回演出中也应使用Ad Lib来做门票销售代理。
这5道题目都有共同的逻辑错误，“在另外一个地点发生的情况，在本地也必然发生“。考生可以用完全一致的驳斥方法，来驳斥。
另外，Argument题目中大都提供了相当丰富的背景信息，所以考生总不至于无话可说。
总而言之，Argument的难度要比Issue低一些，只要考生把各种逻辑错误熟练的掌握，并能清楚明白的表述出来，成绩一般不会低于4分。
新GRE Argument练习题中的逻辑错误，修文粗略的统计了一下，大概有8、9种，如果考生想要在Argument部分拿到4.5以上的成绩，那么针对每种错误类型练习至少要练习3篇，总数在30左右就可以了。
GRE写作高分范文：知识让事情变得神秘
As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and more mysterious.
当我们获得越来越多的知识，事情并没有变的更加透彻，相反是变的更复杂更神秘。
GRE写作范文：
With the development of the society, natural science and social science help people learn more about the world and the things seems to be clear, actually, under some circumstance, in-depth researches on things cause three consequences at the some time: comprehensible, complex and mysterious rather than merely understand.
Accumulated knowledge helps problems or theories to be expressed clearly and lucidly so that people feel easy to understand the issues. For example, Galileo, who was a famous Italian astronomer who despise the prejudices and book learning of the Aristotelians, who put his question to the nature instead of the ancient, and who drew his conclusion fearlessly. Eventually, his experiment and observation established a new theory and overthrew the old one from Aristotle. Because of his success and theories,people learn how to observe the sky with telescope and begin to understand another space, which is far from the earth. Obviously, without knowledge from Galileo’s theory, universe might also be a inspiration and even a vacancy. Take another scientist for example, Edison, who invented electric bulb by making thousand experiment and brought the society into a brilliant century. Recently, people live in a society which full of light and help them to learn what they can see and observe. With the revolution of human beings, knowledge solves various problems and creates a more comprehensible and comfortable life to the people.
However, those knowledge makes us to considered the reason and origin for human nature of curiosity, as a result, the world become increasingly complex. Take the same instance what have pointed above, although people learn to use telescope to observe the sky, people unsatisfied with such a “observation” and desire to touch with the outer space and understand other planets. In this case, scientists invented the spacecraft which have successfully landed on the Moon and Mars, after these experiments, people know that there are no water and few gravitation in Moon, and the Mas might have the similar condition of the earth. however, the complex problems come out, because people feel difficulty to explain the phenomena in the outer space.
Therefore, the research on astronomy becomes complex and involved. Not only this field, but also all scientific area becomes complicate. When people understand a surface of things, they will feel anxious to learn the core of them, however, the deeper people do researches, the more complications exist.
Additionally, in-depth learning causes desire of researching for mystery, which follows the existence of complication. Indeed, there are many uncanny problems in process of doing research when people hope to point out the reason of complex issue. For example, the construction of pyramid has been an enigma for a long time, because people fail to imagine that the ancient people can construct such a palatial with old and traditional method. Moreover, “black hole” would be a mysterious place that astronomers desire to touch and understand because no one know a little about this untouched field. Faced with these things, human nature motivates and stimulates people to purchase the reason and the secret.
In sum, people learn more about things by accumulating knowledge and then establish new theory and system, and at the same time, complex and mysterious problems exist simultaneously for the desire of exploring secret and untouched field-all of these constitute a process of learning and researching.
GRE写作高分范文：竞争利弊问题
题目：
“Competition is ultimately more beneficial than detrimental to society.”
归根结底，竞争对于社会是利多弊少。
正文：
Darwin suggested that the process of evolution is one based on competition. This deadly competition weeds out the weak and only the fittest of the species survives. Humans, being the product of millions of years of evolution, are by nature, competitive beings. Yet, humans are also social beings. Like the bees in the hive, we are not very successful living completely on our own. We need to cooperate with other individuals for our survival. Thus, a conflict ensues, between our innate competitiveness, and our need to cooperate. There are pros and cons associated with both. However, it is my belief that overall, competition, is more detrimental than beneficial to human society.
First, let us try to identify why there is competition in the first place. In an environment abundant with resources, where supply outstrips demand, there is very little need for the inhabitants to fight with each other over them. This is not the case on planet earth. Resources are limited, and there is constant jostling to get to the front of the queue to get acquire them. For example, thousands of prospective students apply to gain entrance to top universities around the world, but there are only a handful of places in those
universities. Thus, there is competition to get into to these hallowed institutions of higher learning.From a utilitarian perspective, competition is a good thing. In evolution it is responsible for the elimination of “weak” genes. In the business environment, it gets rid of the weaker players. In politics, it weeds out unpopular candidates. In academia, it gets rid of weak students.
Furthermore, competition leads to self improvement. Businesses will strive to offer better products and services at lesser prices. The consumer reaps rich rewards from this competitive spirit. Politicians strive to do the utmost for the people, so they would get reelected. Students excel in there studies, trying to outdo each other.
Thus, ostensibly, competition is responsible for the betterment of the society as a whole. However, this is just the superficial view. Underneath the surface, competition, in every aspect, is slowly eating away at the very fabric of the society.
While it is true to say that competition in corporate world has brought great benefits to the consumer, the society as “Missed A here”whole is playing a great price for it. Most businesses are exploiting cheap labour in the third world to maximise their profits. There are thousands of sweatshops run by well known western corporations in countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh and China. People are forced to work in squalid conditions, often 16 hours a day. They are lucky to receive a dollar a day for there labours. The moment a government in any of these countries try to improve the working conditions of the employees, these multinational giants flee the country, often leaving whole communities facing financial ruin. The corporations are aware that there are plenty of other labour markets that could be exploited with gay abandon.
That is just the human cost. What about the environmental costs? Competition has forced many corporations to “stream line” their operations. Environmental standards are normally the first victims of this “stream line” process. A significant amount of environmental pollution and land degradation has been blamed on industry, yet the factories keep producing more and more. Thousands of items go unsold each year due to competition. Only a fraction of this merchandise is recycled. The rest goes to the already overflowing landfills.
篇2：GRE写作：分类解析
准备时，最重要的一个步骤在于熟悉题库和认真准备提纲。对于立论文(Issue)而言，自己动手拟一份完整的提纲是很有必要的，当然可以参考各种资料，但必须勤动脑，想一想提纲的逻辑连续性。实际上，有偏向性、但又不要绝对化的思路才是最易上手的。
对于驳论文(Argument)而言，熟悉题库更为重要。很多人觉得一个题目拿过来随便就能挑出五六个错误。正常情况下是这样的，但的确有些难题若不事先好好准备，五分钟之内能找出两个错误就不错了。在第一次考试时，我正是因为在准备时放掉了一道我只找出两个错误的题目，而在正式考试时恰恰碰到了这道题目，所以写得很不好。
虽然逻辑作文满分只有6分，可千万别小看了它的重要性。从某种程度上来说，它是GRE作文的精华——因为GRE考试的就是逻辑，用英语写两篇作文只是形式而已，主要目的就是考察你的逻辑分析水平。
写驳论文有很多小窍门，如需要锻炼出区别“事实”和“观点”的能力，不论题目中所给的事实有多夸张都需认为它是对的，不能攻击，只能攻击观点中的逻辑漏洞;凡是跟统计数字、统计方法有关的逻辑错误都尽量不要攻击，最多只能一笔带过等等。
篇3：GRE写作：分类解析
Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within this group of people, 75 percent of those who had
accidents in streets or parking lots were not wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, these statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.
The notion that protective gear reduces the injuries suffered in accidents seems at first glance to be an obvious conclusion. After all, it is the intent of these products to either provent accidents from occuring in the first place or to reduce the injuries suffered by the wearer should an accident occur. However, the conclusion that investing in high quality protective gear greatly reduces the risk of being severely injured in an accident may mask other (and potentially more significant) causes of injuries and may inspire people to over invest financially and psychologically in protective gear.
First of all, as mentioned in the argument, there are two distinct kinds of gear - preventative gear (such as light reflecting material) and protective gear (such as helmets). Preventative gear is intended to warn others, presumably for the most part motorists, of the presence of the roller skater. It works only if the “other” is a responsible and caring individual who will afford the skater the necessary space and attention. Protective gear is intended to reduce the effect of any accident, whether it is caused by an other, the skater or some force of nature. Protective gear does little, if anything, to prevent accidents but is presumed to reduce the injuries that occur in an accident. The statistics on injuries suffered by skaters would be more interesting if the skaters were grouped into those wearing no gear at all, those wearing protective gear only, those wearing preventative gear only and those wearing both. These statistics could provide skaters with a clearer understanding of which kinds of gear are more beneficial.
The argument above is weakened by the fact that it does not take into account the inherent differences between skaters who wear gear and those who do not. If is at least likely that those who wear gear may be generally more responsible and/or safety conscious individuals. The skaters who wear gear may be less likely to cause accidents through careless or dangerous behavior. It may, in fact, be their natural caution and repsonsibility that keeps them out of the emergency room rather than the gear itself. Also, the statistic above is based entirely on those who are skating in streets and parking lots which are relatively dangerous places to skate in the first place. People who are generally more safety conscious (and therefore more likely to wear gear) may choose to skate in safer areas such as parks or back yards.
The statistic also goes not differentiate between severity of injuries. The conclusion that safety gear prevents severe injuries suggests that it is presumed that people come to the emergency room only with severe injuries. This is certainly not the case. Also, given that skating is a recreational activity that may be primarily engaged in during evenings and weekends (when doctors' offices are closed), skater with less severe injuries may be especially likely to come to the emergency room for treatment.
Finally, there is absolutely no evidence provided that high quality (and presumably more expensive) gear is any more beneficial than other kinds of gear. For example, a simple white t-shirt may provide the same preventative benefit as a higher quality, more expensive, shirt designed only for skating. Before skaters are encouraged to invest heavily in gear, a more complete understanding of the benefit provided by individual pieces of gear would be helpful.
The argument for safety gear based on emergency room statistics could provide important information and potentially saves lives. Before conclusions about the amount and kinds of investments that should be made in gear are reached, however, a more complete understanding of the benefits are needed. After all, a false confidence in ineffective gear could be just as dangerous as no gear at all.
Commentary
This outstanding response demonstrates the writer's insightful analytical skills. The introduction, which notes that adopting the topic's fallacious reasoning could “.??爄nspire people to over invest financially and psychologically in protective gear,” is followed by a comprehensive examination of each of the argument's root flaws. Specifically, the writer exposes several points that undermine the argument:
-- that preventive and protective gear are not the same
-- that skaters who wear gear may be less prone to accidents because they are, by nature, more responsible and cautious
-- that the statistics do not differentiate by the severity of the injuries
-- that gear may not need to be high-quality to be beneficial
The discussion is smoothly and logically organized, and each point is thoroughly and cogently developed. In addition, the writing is succinct, economical, and generally error-free. Sentences are varied and complex, and diction is expressive and precise.
In sum, this response exemplifies the very top of the 6 range described in the scoring guide. If the writer had been less eloquent or provided fewer reasons to refute the argument, the paper could still have received a 6.
篇4：GRE写作：分类解析
Hospital statistics regarding people who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents indicate the need for more protective equipment. Within this group of people, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots were not wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, these statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.
The argument presented is limited but useful. It indicates a possible relationship between a high percentage of accidents and a lack of protective equipment. The statistics cited compel a further investigation of the usefulness of protective gear in preventing or mitigating roller-skating related injuries. However, the conclusion that protective gear and reflective equipment would “greatly reduce.risk of being severely injured” is premature. Data is lacking with reference to the total population of skaters and the relative levels of experience, skill and physical coordination of that population. It is entirely possible that further research would indicate that most serious injury is averted by the skater's ability to react quickly and skillfully in emergency situations.
Another area of investigation necessary before conclusions can be reached is identification of the types of injuries that occur and the various causes of those injuries. The article fails to identify the most prevalent types of roller-skating related injuries. It also fails to correlate the absence of protective gear and reflective equipment to those injuries. For example, if the majority of injuries are skin abrasions and closed-head injuries, then a case can be made for the usefulness of protective clothing mentioned. Likewise, if injuries are caused by collision with vehicles (e.g. bicycles, cars) or pedestrians, then light-reflective equipment might mitigate the occurences. However, if the primary types of injuries are soft-tissue injuries such as torn ligaments and muscles, back injuries and the like, then a greater case could be made for training and experience as preventative measures.
Commentary
This strong response gets right to the work of critiquing the argument, observing that it “indicates a possible relationship” but that its conclusion “is premature.” It raises three central questions that, if answered, might undermine the soundness of the argument:
-- What are the characteristics of the total population of skaters? -- What is the usefulness of protective or reflective gear in preventing or mitigating rollerskating-related injuries? -- What are the types of injuries sustained and their causes?
The writer develops each of these questions by considering possible answers that would either strengthen or weaken the argument. The paper does not analyze the argument as insightfully or develop the critique as fully as required for a 6 paper, but the clear organization, strong control of language, and substantial degree of development warrant more than a score of 4.
篇5：GRE考试写作解析及作文提纲分析
GRE考试写作专题解析及作文提纲分析
GRE写作题库之GRE作文题目：
“Government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.”
GRE写作精讲之提纲解析：
政府应该资助艺术
1、承认政府资助带有政治偏见时对艺术发展有不良影响
Thus, the arts sponsored by the government will lose the freedom of the self-expression, which is the
basis of a real product of work. 30-50s Take the Soviet nation as a supporting example. The Soviet
leaders, imposing their will on the arts, were berated for their high-handed policy. Though the
condition began to soften, the arts in the nation need a long time to recover, needless to say to thrive.
2、艺术需要政府资助
艺术家没有商业头脑，有的艺术不被时代接受，却有重大价值vogho
3、政府资助艺术可以促进艺术继承和发展
京剧，失传
a) 如果政府不对艺术进行扶持，艺术家完全可以凭借自己本身对艺术的酷爱来创作艺术作品。但是如果艺术
家不能从艺术上得到最起码的物质生活保证，那么就会阻碍艺术的发展，因为会有越来越少的人来从事艺术。
b) 政府对艺术的资助和扶持有助于艺术的发展，也有利于其它人去从事艺术创作。比如中国的唐朝，政府对艺术
扶持，使得当时无论是绘画还是音乐，包括文学都给后人留下了很多宝贵的遗产。
c) 当政府把过多的精力放到艺术上的时候，或者过多的放到某一类艺术的时候，就会让很多艺术家为了迎合社会
需要而创作艺术作品，这样就妨碍了艺术的完整性。比如政府总是支持艺术家去创作那些高深的，抽象的，复杂的
艺术作品，会使得艺术家创作大量这方面的艺术，而那些来自生活的，简单的，一般人可以欣赏的艺术作品却很少，
不能满足人们的需要，则这样就破坏了艺术的完整性。
总结：政府的`资助有利于艺术的发展，但是如果强加在艺术上的政治色彩太浓的时候就会影响
“Government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.”
政府资助艺术会威胁到艺术的完整性。 101
提纲：不完全反对
1.为了得到政府的资助，有些艺术家可能会趋向于创造一些哗众取宠的作品，在这个方面，政府资助可能会影响到艺术的完整性。
2.但是，艺术家需要资助来解决衣食等基本需求，这样他们才能更好地进行艺术创作。因此，政府资助非但不会威胁到艺术的完整性，反而有利于艺术的发展。
3.艺术需要被公众了解才能体现其 integrity，因此在普及，宣传需要的资金也是很大的数目，需要funds.
4.尤其是庞大的建筑艺术，更需要政府的资助才能得到发展。
这个怎么举例子啊，实在想不出来，大家帮帮忙啦?
.政府资助威胁艺术完整性
一、确实不该政府资助威胁完整性，imbalance, 政府也不懂艺术，最好拿给私人基金，但在穷地方政府可以资助
二、It is true that government funding has harmful impact on art.
1.To enlist, sing praises, violate principle of art, visceral passion, creative impulse
2. bribe，****
3.政府的 vested interest
三、政府的错误观念 it is fallacious to delegate the decisions about art funding to a few bureaucrats
because no single authority should have monopoly of judging how value an art is.
1. there is no single standard...
2. quirky notions, imbalance
四、给私人 private foundations can play an essential role in supporting arts effectively, even much
better than government.
1.Multiplicity
2. 足够多，艺术家可以自由选择，不用 succumb to parons
3.热爱，不会强制艺术家，而且voluntary, 不是缴税
五、in some developin
g countries, where social basic problems are pressing, private funding may be
not as affluent as that in developed countries.
1.人们更关系基本问题，穿衣，food，shelter
2. 富人也更偏爱投资而非赞助
3.艺术的重要性，在这些地区更加需要
T “Government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.” . 政府对艺术的资助威胁着艺术的完整性
① 艺术家也是普通人，艺术活动需要物质基础。但这种物质基础并不等同于政府资助，个人的物质条件一般而言就足够了。
② 苦难有时更能激发高层次的艺术。 A 社会大环境 文艺复兴 B个人小环境 Vincent Gogh, Dante童年父母双亡，青年时候被流放，在以后近二十年的流放生涯中，写出了《神曲 Divine comedy
③ 政府的资助可能使艺术家的作品变形。如：一味的歌功颂德。
④ 政府的资助还可能使并不热爱艺术的人混进艺术家的行列。
篇6：GRE考试题目及解析
GRE考试题目及解析
1、2解： 不确定
2、X~3 * y = 10 ~6 (y >1)， 问X 与 10~2比大小
解：x=10~2/y~1/3y>1则y~1/3>1 所以还是10~2大选B
3、数列：a1=3， a2=6， a(n)= a(n-1)/a(n-2)， 问：a(150)=?
解：3， 6， 2， 1/3， 1/6， 1/2， 3， 6， (每6次一个循环，答案应该是1/2吧)
另一版本：
前人几经有误，我的是：a1=2， a2=6， an=a(n-1)/a(n-2)， 求a150
2， 6， 3， 1/2， 1/6， 1/3 ， 2， 6， 3， …所以我的答案是1/3
(大家看清楚A1的值，自己判断吧)
4、125w+25x+5y+z=264，x，y，z，w，are nonnegative integrate，and no more than 5，what is w+x+y+z?
解：用短除法把256写成五进制就是2024，则得到x+y+z+w=2+0+2+4=8
5、a * x平方+B*X+k=0(a和b已知，k未知)，给出一个X的值，问另一个。
简单，解出K后，再解出X2
6、a，b，c，-5，-10的平均数和a，b，c，5，10的平均数之差是多少?
解：在考场遇到时看清楚谁在前。 答案是-6 ，也许是6。
7、F(X)=2的2X-1方， 求F(3+X)F(3-X)
解：2的10次方
8、-7
解：当X= -7 ，Y= 0 时最大， 49。
9、有个公式很重要。求M到N之间是Q的倍数的数有多少个?
公式是： [(该范围内Q的最大倍数-该范围内Q的'最小倍数)/Q ] +1
今天我碰到两个这样的题，多亏有这个公式，要不然就费劲了
10、一个数，被9整除得x1+x2+x3，被12整除得x2+x3，则这个数至少为?能被x1整除?
答案：369(x1+x2+x3)=12(x2+x3) x1=3(x2+x3)……、、
11、数列a1，a2，、、、a10、除了第一项外的各项都是其前一项的1/2。 已知a10 >0、01
故 (1) a1>5 (2)a1>10 (3)a1是个even integer、
选项: 1、仅有(1)对(答案) a10=a1~9>1/100
【解析GRE考试写作复习】相关文章：
9.GRE考试结构
10.gre考试流程
文档为doc格式
