GRE写作：写作模板攻略介绍

gre写作范例有用吗?今天小编给大家带来GRE写作范例有用吗，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：写作范例有用吗

对于写作，不一定是你例子背得多、反复地用例子来举证论点就能写出一篇好文章，最好还是要找一本国外的写作教材来进行参考，弄清楚国外写作的具体要求，像《经济学人》、《时代周刊》这上面的评述类的文章都可以拿来进行借鉴，多进行模仿和学习。

在这里像各位同学推荐一本国外教材，北大引进进来的，叫做《分析性写作》，这本书在书店都是可以买到的，大家可以从里面学习如何论证自己的分论点，这些都写得比较详细。

中国学生写作时喜欢写一些大词和长句，觉得句子长了文章也就会写得好，但GRE作文却不是这么回事，有可能你自以为自己写的很好，但是逻辑性是不严密的， 可能外国人就会觉得很啰嗦，没有什么实质性的内容，结果就会导致分数比较低。

GRE作文关键是要反复多练，要仔细地反复地研究OG上面的范文，因为只有OG上面的文章是经过ETS认证的，所以一定要把这些范文研究得分成透彻，达到滚瓜烂熟的程度，掌握它每一个评分标准的要求，研究好为什么会给这篇范文6分而给另一篇3分;另外，学生在做GRE阅读时可以通过模仿这些阅读文章来提高自己的写作水平。

GRE写作满分范文赏析

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.  

Although the argument stated above discusses the importance of safety equipment as significant part of avoiding injury, the statistics quoted are vague and inconclusive.  Simply because 75 percent of the people involved in roller-skating accidents are not wearing the stated equipment does not automatically implicate the lack of equipment as the cause of injury.  The term "accidents" may imply a great variety of injuries.  The types of injuries one could incur by not wearing the types of equipment stated above are minor head injuries; skin abrasions or possibly bone fracture of a select few areas such as knees, elbows, hands, etc. (which are in fact most vulnerable to this sport); and/or injuries due to practising the sport during low light times of the day.  During any physically demanding activity or sport people are subjected to a wide variety of injuries which cannot be avoided with protective clothing or light-reflective materials.  These injuries include inner trauma (e.g., heart-attack); exhaustion; strained muscles, ligaments, or tendons; etc.  Perhaps the numbers and percentages of people injured during roller-skating, even without protective equipment, would decrease greatly if people participating in the sport had proper training, good physical health, warm-up properly before beginning (stretching), as well as take other measures to prevent possible injury, such as common-sense, by refraining from performing the activity after proper lighting has ceased and knowing your personal limitations as an individual and athlete.  The statistics used in the above reasoning are lacking in proper direction considering their assertions and therefore must be further examined and modified so that proper conclusions can be reached.  

Commentary  

This adequate response targets the argument's vague and inconclusive "statistics."  The essay identifies and critiques the illogical reasoning that results from the misguided use of the argument's statistics:  

-- that non-use of equipment may be "automatically" assumed to be the    cause of injury 

-- that "accidents" may refer to minor injuries 

-- that injuries may result from other causes -- skating in the dark,    failure to train or warm-up properly, failure to recognize one's    physical limitations  

The writer competently grasps the weaknesses of the argument.  The ideas are clear and connected, but the response lacks transitional phrases.  Development, too, is only adequate.  

Control of language is better than adequate.  The writer achieves both control and clarity and ably conforms to the conventions of written English.  Overall, though, this 4 response lacks the more thorough development that would warrant a score of 5.

GRE写作满分范文赏析

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 arguement is well presented and supported, but not completely well reasoned.  It is clear and concisely written.  The content is logically and smoothly presented.  Statistics cited are used to develop support for the recommendation, that roller skaters who invest in protective gear and reflective equipment can reduce their risk of severe, accidental injuries.  Examples of the types of protective equipment are described for the reader.  Unfortunately, the author of the argement fails to note that merely by purchasing gear and reflective equipment that the skater will be protected.  This is, of course, falacious if the skater fails to use the equipment, or uses it incorrectly or inappropriately.  It is also an unnecessary assumption that a skater need purchase high-quality gear for the same degree of  effectiveness to be achieved.  The argument could be improved by taking these issues into consideration, and making recommendations for education and safety awareness to skaters.  

Commentary  

The first half of this generally well-written but limited response merely describes the argument.  The second half of the paper identifies two assumptions of the argument:  

-- that people who purchase protective gear will use the gear -- that high-quality gear is more effective than other gear  

These points are sufficient to constitute some analysis and thus warrant a score of 3.  However, neither of these analytic points is developed sufficiently to merit a score of 4.