GRE写作：开头结尾的具体技巧

GRE写作有几种类型呢?今天小编给大家带来GRE写作具体分类，希望能够帮助到大家，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

GRE写作：具体分类

1. 只分了大类，可操作性差。比如XDF的分类，总共就只有8个，但是光写8篇作文又肯定是不够的。这就需要我们每一类下面还要根据写法和内容而具体分成各种小类，以达到一个小分类只写一篇的目的。笔者在手头资料的基础上，总结出涵盖了ISSUE全部题库的23个小类。在复习的时候，大家最少只要写20-23篇作文就可以完成ISSUE作文题库全覆盖的复习任务了，既放心又省力。

2. 分类中的题目描述过于啰嗦，不便于一眼看出题目的联系。市面上GRE的复习材料已经这么多，在复习的时候我们应该更多地做减法。比如作文这里，既然在网上就能很方便地找到翻译好的题库，又何苦在每个分类里把双语题目都打进去?但是只放题目，不放题号的话，又容易漏题出错，更不利于复习。笔者的解决方案，是在大类上体现出这一类的共性，题号后面则用中文简练地总结这一道题目的特性。

3. 分类不完整，或者题号有错误。这是最致命的错误。我最初在练习的时候，就随便选了一个题库，开始准备提纲。结果准备到一半，忽然发现分类题库里有很重要的几道高频没包括进来，又有几道题由于题号错误而分错了类。一怒之下，笔者对着ETS官网上的作文题库编号一道一道地把手里的作文题号和题目对清楚。这绝对是市面上最完整的ISSUE作文分类，没有之一!

分类开始：

近期长期

A.一举成名 OR 踏实努力?

年轻人 51、71

先做后想 61

政府 19

研究者 129

B.经济发展 VS 环境/文化艺术

法律保护保护区 10、125、148

濒危物种 31、63、67

历史遗迹 119

教育

大学教育：

A. 应该政府出钱 12、25

家长应该在学校多花时间 81、95

B.多样性

学生应该出国留学 82、97、100、123

学生应该多选副科 13、46、70、102、112、140

教师应该出去工作V.S.只教学 73

教师薪水应当与学生成绩挂钩 30、83

编制课程：

政府应当统一课程 6、14、96、116

应当按学生兴趣设置课程 40、47、90

应当注重知识还是想象力? 54

想象文学、105知识>经验、106、126

特殊教育： 天才是否应当设置特殊课程 37

C.教育的目的

解放思维 17、68

GRE写作满分范文赏析

"It is unfortunate that today's educators place so much emphasis on finding out what students want to include in the curriculum and then giving it to them.  It is the educators' duty to determine the curriculum and the students' duty to study what is presented to them."  

In today's society, there is too much emphasis placed on students desires rather than their needs.  The students of today should have to study what is presented to them, rather than what is desired by them.  Students are searching for the easy way out, and educators' are supplying them with that.  Students should not only be presented with mandatory curriculum, but the educators should strive to insure that each individual student truly gains from their education, rather than just breezing through it. 

It is vital to the continued success and expansion of the United States, that the young people be challenged in their curriculum and be encouraged to succeed in all that they do.  The educators should determine a more strenuous curriculum, and enforce it at an earlier age.  Thus, the young people of today will expect to be challenged, rather than avoiding it.  Students have the easy way out, and they are not truly giving all that they can.  There is so much potential that is just waiting to flourish, but it is the educators' reponsibility to tap into that potential. 

In conclusion, it is the educators responsibility to enforce curriculum and than raquesting it.  Students should be challenged and expect curriculum that will eventually lead them to a path of success. 

COMMENTARY 

This brief essay is flawed by its generalities, repetition, and limited development.  The central thesis -- that it is the burden of educators to teach what they believe is necessary and that our educational system should not allow students to "breeze through" the educational system -- is not adequately supported.  The middle of the essay merely repeats much of what was said in the introduction.  The writer discusses the concepts of students' potential and educators' responsibilities in only the most general terms. 

The two-sentence conclusion simply repeats earlier discussion and does not sufficiently tie together and comment upon the earlier discussion.  To earn a score of 4, this essay would need to provide specific reasons and examples that more adequately develop its main points. 

Also, the phrasing is often vague ("giving all that they can" and "path of success"), and the syntax is at times poorly controlled ("young people of today will expect to be challenged, rather than avoiding it.")  Still, the problems are not severe or frequent.  For all of these reasons, this essay received a 3. 

GRE写作满分范文赏析

"It is unfortunate that today's educators place so much emphasis on finding out what students want to include in the curriculum and then giving it to them.  It is the educators' duty to determine the curriculum and the students' duty to study what is presented to them."  

The statement above conceals intesting connotations far above curriculum development.  Issues of classroom control and development of scholarly talents are at stake, not simply a debate over which books are acceptable or over revisionist histories. 

The statement itself is a bit misleading in that in my experience, student control over curriculum hardly existed.  Each year, there were certain course offerings made available, and students were to choose from those offerings, of course bearing in mind requirements for graduation set forth by the administration.  On a classroom level, the immediate, initial material may have  been somewhat directed by the students, but this was a part of the process allowed by the teacher/professor in order to gain the interest and attention of the students.  However, too much of any one thing becomes problematic; letting students set the curriculum, as with letting students choose and design their own major in college, serves ultimately to dilute the quality of the educational experience unless a single advisor can devote significant amounts of time to the individual student.  This amount of time, or even  the expense to the student of this individual attention, seem to indicate that resources would be better allocated elsewhere. 

Of course, any school in which the students decide "what goes" is bound to have problems controlling students.  Once the educators, be they administrators or teachers, are under the control of students, even a democratic situation would be like holding royalty acountable to the mob. Presently, students hear for hours that they should not forget to use a condom in the heat of the moment, and educators think the message gets through,  while half the kids can't even remember to bring a pencil to class.   Students go to school not to simply learn the Pythagorean theorem, but to learn direction and receive guidance. This cannot occur when students are  in charge, and standards, already hard to find in America's contemporary public schools,  will become unenforceable.  If students dictate and administrators do, students will never learn academic responsibility, and if they can't be held accountable for homework, what other responsibilities will they avoid when they get older?

But in another sense, teachers and students do exist in a partnership of sorts.  Teachers are there to satisfy the needs of the student, and the student, while perhaps not being the most experienced/ knowledgeable person  on what his/her needs actually are (versus wants), at least should be afforded some say.   In addition, we must remember what the purpose of education is, and that there are different levels of education. 　  

In high school, the focus is not so much on learning actual material.  The focus is on developing study habits, and on social interaction.  The best secondary schools promote an environment in which individual creativity and pacing can be developed, where students are taught to thinkon their own, and learn to debate and argue in a scholarly way, through writing and other formal methods of discourse.  Group collaboration and interpersonal skills are developed and honed.  The actual details of what is studied and tested is of less importance.  Whether a student reads Maya Angelou, or Yeats, or Euripides essentially is beside the point as long as a student's mind is cultivated, not just their ability to record and recite.  What is important is that secondary students develop and grow in the hands of the professionals. 

The secondary educational experience is designed to prepare a student for college.  It is in college where the individual learns to examine the world and how it works, and the individual's place in it. 

As for duty, it is the educators' duty not simply to determine the curriculum, but to present it effectively.  They cannot half-heartedly paint it on the blackboard, they must enliven it and actually teach.  Hard work must be lauded, while freeloaders are punished.  These are the duties of teachers, and the duty of the students is not just to learn or study, but to grow. An independent mind is what students need, and that mind has to be in a position to want and be able to question beyond the material presented, not simply to question its legitimacy. That distinction, though subtle, is the difference between letting the students follow a self-destructive course of premature self-determination on the one hand , and permitting on the other hand the fostering of great talents through a cooperative, mentoring relationship  

COMMENTARY 

This is an insightful, well-articulated discussion of curricular responsibility and the larger issue of academic responsibility.  After a brief introduction examining assumptions implied by the topic, the writer skillfully develops the position that letting students dictate the curriculum could dilute the educational experience.  Allowing students to determine the curriculum, the writer claims, will deny them the guidance and direction they need to learn academic responsibility.  

The line of reasoning is strengthened by the discussion of how teachers and students can work in partnership to satisfy the needs of students.  The argument is further advanced with concrete examples from high school courses showing how teachers provide guidance for students through group collaboration, development of interpersonal skills, and preparation for college.  The examples are varied (from condom use to reading Angelou, Yeats, or Euripedes) and used effectively to further support the writer's position. 　  

In the conclusion, the writer thoughtfully discusses how educators should not only determine the curriculum but present it in an enlivened and appropriate manner.  The final sentence, contrasting a "self-destructive course of premature self-determination" and "a cooperative, mentoring relationship," ties the essay together.   

The essay is clearly organized, although the writer does not rely on conventional phrases (such as "first," "second," etc.) to signal the organizational structure.  Instead, the organization and focus progress through the line of reasoning that moves fluently and coherently from one paragraph to the next. 

Language use is generally precise and effective (e.g., "holding royalty accountable to the mob"), and sentence structure is well controlled (e.g., "hard work must be lauded, while freeloaders are punished").  The few errors are minor, the kind that can easily be made -- and forgiven -- under testing conditions. 

This outstanding response received a score of 6.