新GRE写作Issue 模板 By Jason Lee
新GREIssue官方范文整理
新GREIssue官方范文整理今日给大家整理新GREIssue 官方范文，快来一起学习吧。
下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。
新GREIssue 官方范文整理1Issue test 1As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.Essay Response — Score 6The statement linking technology negatively with free thinking plays on recent human experience over the past century. Surely there has been no time in history where the lived lives of people have changed more dramatically. A quick reflection on a typical day reveals how technology has revolutionized the world. Most people commute to work in an automobile that runs on an internal combustion engine. During the workday, chances are high that the employee will interact with a computer that processes information on silicon bridges that are .09 microns wide. Upon leaving home, family members will be reached through wireless networks that utilize satellites orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurrences could have been inconceivable at the turn of the 19th century.The statement attempts to bridge these dramatic changes to a reduction in the ability for humans to think for themselves. The assumption is that an increased reliance on technology negates the need for people to think creatively to solve previous quandaries. Looking back at the introduction, one could argue that without a car, computer, or mobile phone, the hypothetical worker would need to find alternate methods of transport, information processing and communication. Technology short circuits this thinking by making the problems obsolete.However, this reliance on technology does not necessarily preclude the creativity that marks the human species. The prior examples reveal that technology allows for convenience. The car, computer and phone all release additional time for people to live more efficiently. This efficiency does not preclude the need for humans to think for themselves. In fact, technology frees humanity to not only tackle new problems, but may itself create new issues that did not exist without technology. For example, the proliferation of automobiles has introduced a need for fuel conservation on a global scale. With increasing energy demands from emerging markets, global warming becomes a concern inconceivable to the horse-and-buggy generation. Likewise dependence on oil has created nation-states that are not dependent on taxation, allowing ruling parties to oppress minority groups such as women. Solutions to these complex problems require the unfettered imaginations of maverick scientists and politicians.In contrast to the statement, we can even see how technology frees the human imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advent of the internet has allowed for an unprecedented exchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internet portal for medical information, permits patients to self research symptoms for a more informed doctor visit. This exercise opens pathways of thinking that were previously closed off to the medical layman. With increased interdisciplinary interactions, inspiration can arrive from the most surprising corners. Jeffrey Sachs, one of the architects of the UN Millenium Development Goals, based hisideas on emergency care triage techniques. The unlikely marriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflation environments from South America to Eastern Europe.This last example provides the most hope in how technology actually provides hope to the future of humanity. By increasing our reliance on technology, impossible goals can now be achieved. Consider how the late 20th century witnessed the complete elimination of smallpox. This disease had ravaged the human race since prehistorical days, and yet with the technology of vaccines, free thinking humans dared to imagine a world free of smallpox. Using technology, battle plans were drawn out, and smallpox was systematically targeted and eradicated.Technology will always mark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the implementation of nanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be no limit to the number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no need to retreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopeful posture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues of human imagination.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 6The author of this essay stakes out a clear and insightful position on the issue and follows the specific instructions by presenting reasons to support that position. The essay cogently argues that technology does not decrease our ability to think for ourselves, but merely provides additional time for people to live more efficiently. In fact, the problems that have developed alongside the growth of technology (pollution, political unrest in oil-producing nations) actually call for more creative thinking, not less.In further examples, the essay shows how technology allows for the linking of ideas that may never have been connected in the past (like medicine and economic models), pushing people to think in new ways.Examples are persuasive and fully developed; reasoning is logically sound and well supported.Ideas in the essay are connected logically, with effective transitions used both between paragraphs (However or In contrast to the statement) and within paragraphs. Sentence structure is varied and complex and the essay clearly demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English (i.e., grammar, usage and mechanics), with only minor errors appearing. Thus, this essay meets all the requirements for receiving a top score.新GREIssue 官方范文整理2Essay Response — Score 5Surely many of us have expressed the following sentiment, or some variation on it, during our daily commutes to work: People are getting so stupid these days! Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, its tempting to believe that technology has isolated and infantilized us, essentally transforming us into dependent, conformist morons best equipped to sideswip one another in our SUVs.Furthermore, hanging around with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom tech-savviness seems to have rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With Teen People style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-striped PDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny, turbo-charged cell phone, technology seems to support young peoples worst tendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved into intergalactic conformity police. After all, todays tech-aided teens are, courtesy of authentic, hands-on video games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chat and instant text messaging, they have their own language; they even havetiny cameras to efficiently photodocument your fashion blunders! Is this adolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?With all this evidence, its easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation of technological wizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce conformity, promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and generally create a culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over cooperation and collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate stages of learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all, even given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear that technology hasnt impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities. Certainly it has incapacitated our behavior and manners; certainly our values have taken a severe blow. However, we are inarguably more efficient in our badness these days. Were effective worker bees of ineffectiveness!If T\technology has so increased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become veritable agents of the awful, virtual CEOs of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial. Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act for ourselves. The first challenge is to figure out how to provide technology users with some direly-needed direction.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 5The language of this essay clearly illustrates both its strengths and weaknesses. The flowery and sometimes uncannily keen descriptions are often used to powerful effect, but at other times this descriptive language results in errors in syntax. See, for example, the problems of parallelism in the second-to-last sentence of paragraph 2 (After all, todays tech-aided teens ...).There is consistent evidence of facility with syntax and complexvocabulary (Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, its tempting to believe...). However, such lucid prose is often countered by anover-reliance on abstractions and tangential reasoning. For example, what does the fact that video games literally train [teens] to kill have to do with the use or deterioration of thinking abilities?Because this essay takes a complex approach to the issue (arguing, in effect, that technology neither enhances nor reduces our ability to think for ourselves, but can do one or the other, depending on the user) and because the author makes use of appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety, a score of 5 is appropriate.新GREIssue 官方范文整理3Essay Response — Score 4In all actuality, I think it is more probable that our bodies will surely deteriorate long before our minds do in any significant amount. Who cant say that technology has made us lazier, but thats the key word, lazy, not stupid. The ever increasing amount of technology that we incorporate into our daily lives makes people think and learn every day, possibly more than ever before. Our abilities to think, learn, philosophize, etc. may even reach limits never dreamed of before by average people. Using technology to solve problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race.If you think about it, using technology to solve more complicating problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning, opening up whole new worlds for many people. Many of these people are glad for the chance to expand their horizons by learning more, going to new places, and trying new things. If it wasnt for the invention of new technological devices, I wouldnt be sitting at this computer trying tophilosophize about technology. It would be extremely hard for children in much poorer countries to learn and think for themselves with out the invention of the internet. Think what an impact the printing press, a technologically superior mackine at the time, had on the ability of the human race to learn and think.Right now we are seeing a golden age of technology, using it all the time during our every day lives. When we get up theres instant coffee and the microwave and all these great things that help us get ready for our day. But we arent allowing our minds to deteriorate by using them, we are only making things easier for ourselves and saving time for other important things in our days. Going off to school or work in our cars instead of a horse and buggy. Think of the brain power and genius that was used to come up with that single invention that has changed the way we move across this globe.Using technology to solve our continually more complicated problems as a human race is definately a good thing. Our ability to think for ourselves isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow, moving on to higher though functions and more ingenious ideas. The ability to use what technology we have is an exampleReader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 4This essay meets all the criteria of a level-4 essay. The writer develops a clear position (Using technology to solve our problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race). The position is then developed with relevant reasons (using technology to solve more complicat[ed] problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning and we are seeing a golden age of technology).Point 1, using technology, is supported with the simple but relevant notion that technology allows us access to information and abilities to which we would not normally have access. Similarly, point 2, the goldenage, is supported by the basic description of our technologically saturated social condition. Though the overall development and organization of the essay does suffer from an occasional misdirection (see paragraph 3s abrupt progression from coffee pots to the benefits of technology to cars), the essay as a whole flows smoothly and logically from one idea to the next.It is useful to compare this essay to the level-3 essay presented next. Though both essays entail some surface-level discussion and often fail to probe deeply into the issue, this writer does take the analysis a step further. In paragraph 2, the distinction between this essay and the next one (the level-3 response) can most clearly be seen. To support the notion that advances in technology actually help increase thinking ability, the writer draws a clever parallel between the promise of modern, sophisticated technology (computer) and the actual impact of equally promising and pervasive technologies of the past (printing press).Like the analysis, the language in this essay clearly meets the requirements for a score of 4. The writer displays sufficient control of language and the conventions of standard written English. The preponderance of mistakes are of a cosmetic nature (trying to solve more complicating problems.) There is a sentence fragment (Going off ...) along with a comma splice (Our ability ... isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow ...) in paragraph 3. However, these errors are minor and do not interfere with the clarity of the ideas being presented.新GREIssue 官方范文整理4Essay Response — Score 3There is no current proof that advancing technology will deteriorate the ability of humans to think. On the contrary, advancements in technology had advanced our vast knowledge in many fields, opening opportunities for further understanding and achievement. For example,the problem of dibilitating illnesses and diseases such as alzheimers disease is slowing being solved by the technological advancements in stem cell research. The future ability of growing new brain cells and the possibility to reverse the onset of alzheimers is now becoming a reality. This shows our initiative as humans to better our health demonstrates greater ability of humans to think.One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds is the use of internet and cell phones. In the past humans had to seek out information in many different enviroments and aspects of life. Now humans can sit in a chair and type anything into a computer and get an answer. Our reliance on this type of technology can be detrimental if not regulated and regularily substituted for other information sources such as human interactions and hands on learning. I think if humans understand that we should not have such a reliance on computer technology, that we as a species will advance further by utilizing the opportunity of computer technology as well as the other sources of information outside of a computer. Supplementing our knowledge with internet access is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 3This essay never moves beyond a superficial discussion of the issue. The writer attempts to develop two points: that advancements in technology have progressed our knowledge in many fields and that supplementing rather than relying on technology is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race. Each point, then, is developed with relevant but insufficient evidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge in many fields (a broad subject, rife with possible examples), the writer uses only one limited and very brief example from a specific field (medicine and stem-cell research).Development of the second point is hindered by a lack of specificity and organization. The writer creates what might be best described as an outline. The writer cites a need for regulation/supplementation and warns of the detriment of over-reliance upon technology. However, the explanation of both the problem and solution is vague and limited (Our reliance ... can be detrimental. If humans understand that we should not have such a reliance ... we will advance further). There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarification of what is meant by supplementing. This second paragraph is a series of generalizations that are loosely connected and lack a much-needed grounding.In the essay, there are some minor language errors and a few more serious flaws (e.g., The future ability of growing new brain cells or One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds). Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writers meaning is generally clear. Thus, this essay earns a score of 3.新GREIssue 官方范文整理5Essay Response — Score 2In recent centuries, humans have developed the technology very rapidly, and you may accept some merit of it, and you may see a distortion in society occured by it. To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays. There are many symptoms and resons of it. However, I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinkng thoroughly.Of course, you can see the phenomena of human laziness along with developed technology in some place. However, they would happen in specific condition, not general. What makes human to be laze of thinking is not merely technology, but the the tendency of human that they treat them as a magic stick and a black box. Not understanding the aims and theory of them couses the disapproval problems.The most important thing to use the thechnology, regardless the new or old, is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them, and to adapt suit tech to tasks in need. Even if you recognize a method as a all-mighty and it is extremely over-spec to your needs, you can not see the result you want. In this procedure, humans have to consider as long as possible to acquire adequate functions. Therefore, humans can not escape from using their brain.In addition, the technology as it is do not vain automatically, the is created by humans. Thus, the more developed tech and the more you want a convenient life, the more you think and emmit your creativity to breakthrough some banal method sarcastically.Consequently, if you are not passive to the new tech, but offensive to it, you would not lose your ability to think deeply. Furthermore, you may improve the ability by adopting it.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 2The language of this essay is what most clearly links it to the score of 2. Amidst sporadic moments of clarity, this essay is marred by serious errors in grammar, usage and mechanics that often interfere with meaning. It is unclear what the writer means when he/she states, To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays, or to adapt suit tech to tasks in need.Despite such severe flaws, the writer has made an obvious attempt to respond to the prompt (I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinking thoroughly) as well as an unclear attempt to support such an assertion (Not understanding the aims and theory of them [technology] couses the disapproval problems and The most important thing to use the thechnology ... is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them). On the whole, the essay displays aseriously flawed but not fundamentally deficient attempt to develop and support its claims.(Note: In this specific case, the analysis is tied directly to the language. As the language falters, so too does the analysis.)Essay Response — Score 1Humans have invented machines but they have forgot it and have started everything technically so clearly their thinking process is deterioating.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 1The essay is clearly on topic, as evidenced by the writers usage of the more significant terms from the prompt: technically (technologically), humans, thinking (think) and deteriorating (deteriorate). Such usage is the only clear evidence of understanding. Meaning aside, the brevity of the essay (one sentence) clearly indicates the writers inability to develop a response that follows the specific instructions given (Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take).The language, too, is clearly level 1, as the sentence fails to achieve coherence. The coherent phrases in this one-sentence response are those tied to the prompt: Humans have invented machines and their thinking process is deteriorating. Otherwise, the point being made is unclear新GREIssue 官方范文整理文章到此就结束了，欢迎大家下载使用并丰富，共享给更多有需要的人。
gre写作issue模板
gre写作issue模板当涉及GRE写作issue模板时，以下是一个常用的模板：1.引言：简要描述讨论的主题，并提出针对该主题的争议或问题。
2.背景信息：提供相关的背景资料，以便读者能够更好地理解讨论的上下文。
3.观点一：阐述第一个观点，包括其优势和劣势，并提供支持该观点的理由和例证。
4.观点二：阐述第二个观点，同样包括其优势和劣势，并提供支持该观点的理由和例证。
5.反驳观点：回应可能存在的反对意见或观点，并提供进一步的解释和例证。
6.结论：总结以上的讨论，强调自己的立场，并提供一些概括性的陈述。
下面是一个示例模板：1.引言：近年来，越来越多的人开始关注环境保护这一全球性的问题。
然而，有人认为采取环境友好型的生活方式对个人来说过于困难和不切实际。
2.背景信息：在当今世界，人类活动对环境造成了严重的负面影响，例如气候变化、空气污染、资源枯竭等。
因此，环境保护已经成为一个迫切的问题。
3.观点一：采取环境友好型的生活方式对个人来说是有困难和不切实际的。
例如，购买环保产品通常比传统产品更昂贵，限制开车或飞行会给人们的生活和工作带来不便等。
4.观点二：然而，采取环境友好型的生活方式对于保护地球和未来世代的生存至关重要。
例如，选择可再生能源、减少能源消耗、鼓励循环利用等措施都可以减少环境污染并延缓资源枯竭。
5.反驳观点：尽管采取环境友好型的生活方式可能面临一些困难和不便，但这些牺牲是值得的。
我们应该更加关注长远利益，而不仅仅追求短期的个人舒适和方便。
6.结论：在面对环境保护这一全球性的挑战时，每个人都应该为了未来世代的生存而采取环境友好型的生活方式。
尽管这可能会带来一些困难和不便，但这是我们应尽的责任和义务。
请注意，这只是一个示例模板，实际写作时可以根据具体题目和观点进行灵活调整。
在GRE写作中，重要的不仅是表达清晰，还需要有逻辑性和充分的支持材料。
GRE写作提纲Issue完整版整合word版
英语学习无论对于学生还是职场人士来说都是非常重要的，很多要出国留学的学生需要准备对应的托福、雅思、SAT、GRE、GMAT等留学考试，获得较高的分数才能申请相对较好的国外大学。
国内大学生经常要备考的是四六级考试，能在四六级考试中获得较高的分数，在今后的职场工作总也会有一定的优势。
英语的学习词汇是基础，各个不同等级的考试对于词汇量的要求也不同，一般要求的词汇量在3000-20000不等。
学好英语在掌握足够词汇量的基础上还要对语法有一定的了解，生活中多练习口语，掌握一些口语交流技能。
为大家整理汇总了下述英语学习材料，方便大家学习查看。
今天我们一起来看看GRE写作提纲Issue完整版吧，下面就和大家，来欣一下吧。
GRE写作提纲Issue完整版A nation should require all of 表态+论述观点：中立偏否定1、在接受高等教育(tertiaryeducation)之前，学习统一的课程有许多优点：a、由于全国学习同样课程，有利于保证教育公平，避免不同教育水平地区差距拉大(widen thedisparity between);b、维护统一，利于开展一致的国民教育，普遍地提高国民素质;c、避免各个地区重复开发课程，极大降低财政负担2、然而，这样也有很大的弊端(seriousdrawbacks)：a、从个体差异来看，不同学生有不同特长，要求全国统一课程显然谋杀了学生的个性，不利于个人发展;b、不同地区有独特文化，尤其在许多文化多样(diverseculture)的国家，不同地区学生接受同样课程可能造成地区文化的流失(gradually fade away)3、事实上，这个问题不可一概而论(We should not make sweepinggeneralizations)：a、对于文化差异不大的国家，可以在要求全国统一部分compulsorycurriculums，同时根据不同学生的需求开设electivecourses，与大学课程设置制度类似，但必修部分较多，选修较少;b、对于文化差异大的国家，则不宜要求统一课程，可设置教学大纲(minimum syllabus)，由各个地区按照大纲设置符合地区文化和发展需求的课程。
GRE-issue写作之自己总结的万能例子
RenaissanceFor example, the helpless fate can be felt from the tragedy works, written by Shakespeare. Mona Lisa, created by Beethoven, revealed the mysterious and implicit smile.Although works completed by different artists and writers revealed slight variations in the access, performing form, and social aspect focusing on, as far as common theme and hidden ideas were concerned, the obvious similries to each other seemed much more than any of the minute differences, namely, resisting the feudalization and corrupt institution and enlightening freedom of human being. This is called “Renaissance” in the history.Genetic engineering迄今为止，基因工程还没有用于人体，但已在从细菌到家畜的几乎所有非人生命物体上做了实验，并取得了成功。
事实上，所有用于治疗糖尿病的胰岛素都来自一种细菌，其ＤＮＡ中被插入人类可产生胰岛素的基因，细菌便可自行复制胰岛素。
基因工程技术使得许多植物具有了抗病虫害和抗除草剂的能力；在美国，大约有一半的大豆和四分之一的玉米都是转基因的。
目前，是否该在农业中采用转基因动植物已成为人们争论的焦点：支持者认为，转基因的农产品更容易生长，也含有更多的营养（甚至药物），有助于减缓世界范围内的饥荒和疾病；而反对者则认为，在农产品中引入新的基因会产生副作用，尤其是会破坏环境。
新GRE写作Argument 模板 By Jason Lee
新GRE写作Argument 模板——By Jason Lee﹡审题+提纲：2min﹡开头+结尾模板：5min﹡中间三段：7min*3=21min﹡补完结尾（检查润色）：2min一、开头-In this argument, the author concludes that...-To bolster this conclusion, the author points out that…-Close scrutiny of these supporting evidences, however, reveals that none of them lend any credibility to the author’s conclusion.二、主体段落展开段落一：-Firstly, the author has tried to reach the conclusion that…by pointing out that…but this argument has failed to see some significant factors.-For instance,-Or, another scenario can be that …展开段落二：-Secondly, by analyzing the conclusion of this argument, we can find the unstated assumption that…-However, the validity of this assumption is challenged by some other possibilities.-It is likely that…-It is of equal probability that..展开段落三：-Finally, even if the foregoing assumptions were all confirmed valid, there remain doubts that render the author’s whole reasoning logically flawed.-To be more specific,-Absent evidence to confirm this assumption, it is entirely possible that…1. Assumptions◆First of all, the author unfairly assumes that…◆After all, the author provides no evidence that…2. Specific Evidences◆The author fails to offer any evidence to warrant this crucial assumption.◆Only if the author could provide the evidence that…can this argument be confirmed valid.◆The assumption cannot be substantiated until the author could provide that…◆As long as the evidence(that/of…) could be offered, the author’s view might be reasonably justified.3. Questions◆The first question of vital prominence could be whether…◆Only if the answer were positive, can the argument be substantiated. In contrast, if the answer were negative, the argument would be considered logically flawed.4. Alternative Explanations◆The explanation offered by the author does not suffice to be evaluated as justifiable based on the given evidence. Alternative explanation could involve that …or that…◆The author’s conclusion unfairly ignores… so a better explanation might be…◆Without considering and ruling out other possible reasons, the author cannot successfully convince me that…*5. 补充一些攻击Flaw的句型(1)样本不足或不具代表性/调查不可靠◆The author provides no evidence that the survey is statistically reliable.◆Perhaps the survey’s sample is not sufficient in size or representative of the quality of…◆The survey methodology might be problematic in several respects:◆As a result, the author cannot justifiably draw any conclusion in light of the survey until adequate evidence is given to lend credibility to it.(2)错误类比（忽略个体差异）◆The author is drawing a false analogy between A and B. It is entirely possible that A and B own divergent situations. Perhaps…Without taking such differences into consideration, it is unconscionable to claim that…(3)方案并非最佳◆The argument fails to consider other possible options for…Perhaps by…or by…◆In short, without weighing the given suggestion against alternatives, it is unconscionable to claim that…(4)非充分/非必要条件、◆The validity of the view that…is never equivalent to the justifiability of the deduction that…(5)时间顺序混淆为因果关系/普通关联混淆为因果关系◆However, the conclusion that A is exclusively responsible for B based on the fact that B occurred after/ at the same time of A is unjustifiable.◆Yet the correlation alone amounts to scarce evidence of the claimed cause-and-effect relationship.(6)错误推论Absent evidence to warrant this deduction, it is entirely possible thatAny of these scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the author’s claim that…The fact (that…) accomplishes nothing towards bolstering the recommendation.*6. 段内/段间承接Absent the evidence,If this is the case,Perhaps,Even assuming/Even if……does not necessarily indicate that…三、结尾-In sum, the argument not only is logically unsound but also relies on several doubtful assumptions.-To reinforce the argument, the author must qualify the recommendation by accounting for possible alternatives and providing comprehensive evidence.-To better assess the argument, we would expect the author to provide adequate information with respect to…。
GRE考试写作范文Issue
GRE考试写作范文Issue多看一些gre作文范文，有利于提高写作水平，我整理了一些范文，下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。
GRE考试写作范文IssueThere is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observers expectations or desires.The speaker claims that all observation is subjective--colored by desire and expectation. While it would be tempting to concede that we all see things differently, careful scrutiny of the speakers claim reveals that it confuses observation with interpretation. In fact, in the end the speakers claim relies entirely on the further claim that there is no such thing as truth and that we cannot truly know anything. While this notion might appeal to certain existentialists and epistemologists, it runs against the grain of all scientific discovery and knowledge gained over the last 500 years.It would be tempting to afford the speakers claim greater merit than it deserves. After all, our everyday experience as humans informs us that we often disagree about what we observe around us. Weve all uttered and heard uttered many times the phase Thats not the way I see it! Indeed, everyday observations--for example, about whether a footballplayer was out of bounds, or about which car involved in an accident ran the red light--vary depending not only on ones spatial perspective but also on ones expectations or desires. If Im rooting for one football team, or if the player is well-known for his ability to make great plays while barely staying in bounds, my desires or expectations might influence what I think I observe. Or if I am driving one of the cars in the accident, or if one car is a souped-up sports car, then my desires or expectations will in all likelihood color my perception of the accidents events.However, these sorts of subjective observations are actually subjective interpretations of what we observe. Visitors to an art museum might disagree about the beauty of a particular work, or even about which color predominates in that work. In a court trial several jurors might view the same videotape evidence many times, yet some jurors might observe an incident of police brutality, will others observe the appropriate use of force to restrain a dangerous individual. Thus when it comes to making judgments about what we observe and about remembering what we observe, each persons individual perspective, values, and even emotions help form these judgments and recollections. It is crucial to distinguish between interpretations such as these and observation, which is nothing more than a sensory experience. Given the same spatial perspective and sensory acuity and awareness, it seems to me that our observations would all be essentially in accord--that is,observation can be objective.Lending credence to my position is Francis Bacons scientific method, according to which we can know only that which we observe, and thus all truth must be based on empirical observation. This profoundly important principle serves to expose and strip away all subjective interpretation of observation, thereby revealing objective scientific truths. For example, up until Bacons time the Earth was observed to lie at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that man (humankind) was the center of Gods creation. Applying Bacons scientific method Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim. Similarly, before Einstein time and space were assumed to be linear, in accordance with our observation. Einsteins mathematical formulas suggested otherwise, and his theories have been proven empirically to be true. Thus it was our subjective interpretation of time and space that led to our misguided notions about them. Einstein, like historys other most influential scientists, simply refused to accept conventional interpretations of what we all observe.In sum, the speaker confuses observation with interpretation and recollection. It is how we make sense of what we observe, not observation itself, that is colored by our perspective, expectations, and desires. The gifted individuals who can set aside their subjectivity and delve deeper into empirical evidence, employing Bacons scientificmethod, are the ones who reveal that observation not only can be objective but must be objective if we are to embrace the more fundamental notion that knowledge and truth exist.GRE考试写作范文IssueBoth parents and communities must be involved in the local schools. Education is too important to leave solely to a group of professional educators.Should parents and communities participate in local education because education is too important to leave to professional educators, as the speaker asserts? It might be tempting to agree with the speaker, based on a parents legal authority over, familiarity with, and interest in his or her own children. However, a far more compelling argument can be made that, except for major decisions such as choice of school, a childs education is best left to professional educators.Communities of parents concerned about their childrens education rely on three arguments for active parental and community participation in that process. The first argument, and the one expressed most often and vociferously, is that parents hold the ultimately legal authority to make key decisions about what and how their own children learn including choice of curriculum and text books, pace and schedule for learning, and the extent to which their child should learn alongside other children. The second argument is that only a parent can truly know theunique needs of a child including what educational choices are best suited for the child. The third argument is that parents are more motivated--by pride and ego--than any other person to take whatever measures are needed to ensure their children receive the best possible education.Careful examination of these three arguments, however, reveals that they are specious at best. As for the first one, were we to allow parents the right to make all major decisions regarding the education of their children, many children would go with little or no education. In a perfect world parents would always make their childrens education one of their highest priorities. Yet, in fact many parents do not. As for the second argument, parents are not necessarily best equipped to know what is best for their child when it comes to education. Although most parents might think they are sufficiently expert by virtue of having gone through formal education themselves, parents lack the specialized training to appreciate what pedagogical methods are most effective, what constitutes a balanced education, how developmental psychology affects a childs capacity for learning at different levels and at different stages of childhood. Professional educators, by virtue of their specialized training in these areas, are far better able to ensure that a child receives a balanced, properly paced education.There are two additional compelling arguments against thespeakers contention. First, parents are too subjective to always know what is truly best for their children. For example, many parents try to overcome their own shortcomings and failed self-expectations vicariously through their childrens accomplishments. Most of us have known parents who push their child to excel in certain areas--to the emotional and psychological detriment of the child. Secondly, if too many parties become involved in making decisions about day-to-day instruction, the end result might be infighting, legal battles, boycotts, and other protests, all of which impede the educational process; and the ultimate victims are the children themselves. Finally, in many jurisdictions parents now have the option of schooling their children at home, as long as certain state requirements are met. In my observation, home schooling allows parents who prefer it great control over a childs education, while allowing the professional educators to discharge their responsibilities as effectively as possible--unfettered by gadfly parents who constantly interfere and intervene.In sum, while parents might seem better able and better motivated to make key decisions about their childs education, in many cases they are not. With the possible exceptions of responsible home-schoolers, a childs intellectual, social, and psychological development is at risk when communities of parents dominate the decision-making process involving education.GRE考试写作范文IssueStudents should bring a certain skepticism to whatever they study. They should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively.The speaker contends that students should be skeptical in their studies, and should not accept passively whatever they are taught. In my view, although undue skepticism might be counterproductive for a young childs education, I strongly agree with the speaker otherwise. If we were all to accept on blind faith all that we are taught, our society would never progress or evolve.Skepticism is perhaps most important in the physical sciences. Passive acceptance of prevailing principles quells innovation, invention, and discovery. In fact, the very notion of scientific progress is predicated on rigorous scientific inquiry--in other words, skepticism. And history is replete with examples of students of science who challenged what they had been taught, thereby paving the way for scientific progress. For example, in challenging the notion that the Earth was in a fixed position at the center of the universe, Copernicus paved the way for the corroborating observations of Galileo a century later, and ultimately for Newtons principles of gravity upon which all modern science is based. The staggering cumulative impact of Copernicus rejection of what he had been taught is proof enough of the value of skepticism.The value of skepticism is not limited to the physical sciences, of course. In the fields of sociology and political science, students must think critically about the assumptions underlying the status quo; otherwise, oppression, tyranny and prejudice go unchecked. Similarly, while students of the law must learn to appreciate timeless legal doctrines and principles, they must continually question the fairness and relevance of current laws. Otherwise, our laws would not evolve to reflect changing societal values and to address new legal issues arising from our ever-evolving technologies.Even in the arts, students must challenge established styles and forms rather than learn to imitate them; otherwise, no genuinely new art would ever emerge. Bee-bop musicians such as Charlie Parker demonstrated through their wildly innovative harmonies and melodies their skepticism about established rules for harmony and melody. In the area of dance Ballanchine showed by way of his improvisational techniques his skepticism about established rules for choreography. And Germanys Bauhaus School of Architecture, to which modern architecture owes its existence, was rooted in skepticism about the proper objective, and resulting design, of public buildings.Admittedly, undue skepticism might be counterproductive in educating young children. I am not an expert in developmental psychology; yet observation and common sense informs me thatyoungsters must first develop a foundation of experiential knowledge before they can begin to think critically about what they are learning. Even so, in my view no student, no matter how young, should be discouraged from asking Why? and Why not?To sum up, skepticism is the very stuff that progress is made of, whether it be in science, sociology, politics, the law, or the arts. Therefore, skepticism should be encouraged at all but the most basic levels of education.GRE考试写作范文IssueThe only responsibility of corporate executives, provided they stay within the law, is to make as much money as possible for their companies.Should the only responsibility of a business executive be to maximize business profits, within the bounds of the law? In several respects this position has considerable merit; yet it ignores certain compelling arguments for imposing on businesses additional obligations to the society in which they operate.On the one hand are two convincing arguments that profit maximization within the bounds of the law should be a business executives sole responsibility. First, imposing on businesses additional duties to the society in which they operate can, paradoxically, harm that society. Compliance with higher ethical standards than the lawrequires--m such areas as environmental impact and workplace conditions--adds to business expenses and lowers immediate profits. In turn, lower profits can prevent the socially conscious business from creating more jobs, and from keeping its prices low and the quality of its products and services high. Thus if businesses go further than their legal duties in serving their communities the end result might be a net disservice to those communities.Secondly, by affirming that profit maximization within legal bounds is the most ethical behavior possible for business, we encourage private enterprise, and more individuals enter the marketplace in the quest of profits. The inevitable result of increased competition is lower prices and better products, both of which serve the interests of consumers. Moreover, since maximizing profits enhances the wealth of a companys stakeholders, broad participation in private enterprise raises the wealth of a nation, expands its economy, and raises its overall standard of living and quality of life.On the other hand are three compelling arguments for holding business executives to certain responsibilities m addition to profit maximization and to compliance with the letter of the law. First, a growing percentage of businesses are related to technology, and haws often lag behind advances in technology. As a result, new technology-based products and services might pose potential harm toconsumers even though they conform to current laws. For example, Internet commerce is still largely unregulated because our lawmakers are slow to react to the paradigm shift from brick-and-mortar commerce to e-commerce. As a result, unethical marketing practices, privacy invasion, and violations of intellectual-property rights are going unchecked for lack of regulations that would clearly prohibit them.Secondly, since a nations laws do not extend beyond its borders, compliance with those laws does not prevent a business from doing harm elsewhere. Consider, for example, the trend among U.S. businesses in exploiting workers in countries where labor laws are virtually non-existent in order to avoid the costs of complying with U.S. labor laws.Thirdly, a philosophical argument can be made that every business enters into an implied social contract with the community that permits it to do business, and that this social contract, although not legally enforceable, places a moral duty on the business to refrain from acting in ways that will harm that community.In sum, I agree with the statement insofar as in seeking to maximize profits a business serves not only itself but also its employees, customers, and the overall economy. Yet todays rapidly changing business environment and increasing globalization call for certain affirmative obligations beyond the pursuit of profit and mere compliance with enforceable rules and regulations. Moreover, in the final analysis anybusiness is indebted to the society in which it operates for its very existence, and thus has a moral duty, regardless of any legal obligations, to pay that debt.GRE考试写作范文Issue。
新GREIssue官方整理
新GREIssue官方整理今日给大家整理新GREIssue 官方范文，快来一起学习吧。
下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。
新GREIssue 官方范文整理1Issue test 1As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.Essay Response — Score 6 The statement linking technology negatively with free thinking plays on recent human experience over the past century. Surely there has been no time in history where the lived lives of people have changed more dramatically. A quick reflection on a typical day reveals how technology has revolutionized the world. Most people commute to work in an automobile that runs on an internal combustion engine. During the workday, chances are high that the employee will interact with a computer that processes information on silicon bridges that are .09 microns wide. Upon leaving home, family members will be reached through wireless networks that utilize satellites orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurrences could have been inconceivable at the turn of the 19th century.The statement attempts to bridge these dramatic changes toa reduction in the ability for humans to think for themselves. The assumption is that an increased reliance on technology negates the need for people to think creatively to solve previous quandaries. Looking back at the introduction, one could argue that without a car, computer, or mobile phone, the hypothetical worker would need to find alternate methods of transport, information processing and communication. Technology short circuits this thinking by making the problems obsolete.However, this reliance on technology does not necessarily preclude the creativity that marks the human species. The prior examples reveal that technology allows for convenience. The car, computer and phone all release additional time for people to live more efficiently. This efficiency does not preclude the need for humans to think for themselves. In fact, technology frees humanity to not only tackle new problems, but may itself create new issues that did not exist without technology. For example, the proliferation of automobiles has introduced a need for fuel conservation on a global scale. With increasing energy demands from emerging markets, global warming becomes a concern inconceivable to the horse-and-buggy generation. Likewise dependence on oil has created nation-states that are not dependent on taxation, allowing ruling parties to oppress minority groups such as women. Solutions to these complex problems require the unfettered imaginations of maverick scientists and politicians.In contrast to the statement, we can even see how technology frees the human imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advent of the internet has allowed for an unprecedentedexchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internet portal for medical information, permits patients to self research symptoms for a more informed doctor visit. This exercise opens pathways of thinking that were previously closed off to the medical layman. With increased interdisciplinary interactions, inspiration can arrive from the most surprising corners. Jeffrey Sachs, one of the architects of the UN Millenium Development Goals, based his ideas on emergency care triage techniques. The unlikely marriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflation environments from South America to Eastern Europe.This last example provides the most hope in how technology actually provides hope to the future of humanity. By increasing our reliance on technology, impossible goals can now be achieved. Consider how the late 20th century witnessed the complete elimination of smallpox. This disease had ravaged the human race since prehistorical days, and yet with the technology of vaccines, free thinking humans dared to imagine a world free of smallpox. Using technology, battle plans were drawn out, and smallpox was systematically targeted and eradicated.Technology will always mark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the implementation of nanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be no limit to the number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no need to retreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopeful posture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues of human imagination.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 6The author of this essay stakes out a clear and insightfulposition on the issue and follows the specific instructions by presenting reasons to support that position. The essay cogently argues that technology does not decrease our ability to think for ourselves, but merely provides additional time for people to live more efficiently. In fact, the problems that have developed alongside the growth of technology (pollution, political unrest in oil-producing nations) actually call for more creative thinking, not less.In further examples, the essay shows how technology allows for the linking of ideas that may never have been connected in the past (like medicine and economic models), pushing people to think in new ways. Examples are persuasive and fully developed; reasoning is logically sound and well supported.Ideas in the essay are connected logically, with effective transitions used both between paragraphs (However or In contrast to the statement) and within paragraphs. Sentence structure is varied and complex and the essay clearly demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English (i.e., grammar, usage and mechanics), with only minor errors appearing. Thus, this essay meets all the requirements for receiving a top score.新GREIssue 官方范文整理2Essay Response — Score 5Surely many of us have expressed the following sentiment, or some variation on it, during our daily commutes to work: People are getting so stupid these days! Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, its tempting tobelieve that technology has isolated and infantilized us, essentally transforming us into dependent, conformist morons best equipped to sideswip one another in our SUVs.Furthermore, hanging around with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom tech-savviness seems to have rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With Teen People style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-striped PDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny, turbo-charged cell phone, technology seems to support young peoples worst tendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved into intergalactic conformity police. After all, todays tech-aided teens are, courtesy of authentic, hands-on video games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chat and instant text messaging, they have their own language; they even have tiny cameras to efficiently photodocument your fashion blunders! Is this adolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?With all this evidence, its easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation of technological wizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce conformity, promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and generally create a culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over cooperation and collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate stages of learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all, even given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear that technology hasnt impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities. Certainly it has incapacitated ourbehavior and manners; certainly our values have taken a severe blow. However, we are inarguably more efficient in our badness these days. Were effective worker bees of ineffectiveness! If T\technology has so increased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become veritable agents of the awful, virtual CEOs of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial. Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act for ourselves. The first challenge is to figure out how to provide technology users with some direly-needed direction.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 5The language of this essay clearly illustrates both its strengths and weaknesses. The flowery and sometimes uncannily keen descriptions are often used to powerful effect, but at other times this descriptive language results in errors in syntax. See, for example, the problems of parallelism in the second-to-last sentence of paragraph 2 (After all, todays tech-aided teens ...). There is consistent evidence of facility with syntax and complex vocabulary (Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDAs gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleamingin their eyeballs, its tempting to believe...). However, such lucid prose is often countered by an over-reliance on abstractions and tangential reasoning. For example, what does the fact that video games literally train [teens] to kill have to do with the use or deterioration of thinking abilities?Because this essay takes a complex approach to the issue (arguing, in effect, that technology neither enhances nor reduces our ability to think for ourselves, but can do one orthe other, depending on the user) and because the author makes use of appropriate vocabulary and sentence variety, a score of 5 is appropriate.新GREIssue 官方范文整理3Essay Response — Score 4In all actuality, I think it is more probable that our bodies will surely deteriorate long before our minds do in any significant amount. Who cant say that technology has made us lazier, but thats the key word, lazy, not stupid. The ever increasing amount of technology that we incorporate into our daily lives makes people think and learn every day, possibly more than ever before. Our abilities to think, learn, philosophize, etc. may even reach limits never dreamed of before by average people. Using technology to solve problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race.If you think about it, using technology to solve more complicating problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning, opening up whole new worlds for many people. Many of these people are glad for the chance to expand their horizons by learning more, going to new places, and trying new things. If it wasnt for the invention of new technological devices, I wouldnt be sitting at this computer trying to philosophize about technology. It would be extremely hard for children in much poorer countries to learn and think for themselves with out the invention of the internet. Think what an impact the printing press, a technologically superior mackine at the time, had on the ability of the human race to learn and think.Right now we are seeing a golden age of technology, using it all the time during our every day lives. When we get up theres instant coffee and the microwave and all these great things that help us get ready for our day. But we arent allowing our minds to deteriorate by using them, we are only making things easier for ourselves and saving time for other important things in our days. Going off to school or work in our cars instead of a horse and buggy. Think of the brain power and genius that was used to come up with that single invention that has changed the way we move across this globe.Using technology to solve our continually more complicated problems as a human race is definately a good thing. Our ability to think for ourselves isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow, moving on to higher though functions and more ingenious ideas. The ability to use what technology we have is an exampleReader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 4This essay meets all the criteria of a level-4 essay. The writer develops a clear position (Using technology to solve our problems will continue to help us realize our potential as a human race). The position is then developed with relevant reasons (using technology to solve more complicat[ed] problems gives humans a chance to expand their thinking and learning and we are seeing a golden age of technology).Point 1, using technology, is supported with the simple but relevant notion that technology allows us access to information and abilities to which we would not normally have access. Similarly, point 2, the golden age, is supported by the basic description of our technologically saturated social condition.Though the overall development and organization of the essay does suffer from an occasional misdirection (see paragraph 3s abrupt progression from coffee pots to the benefits of technology to cars), the essay as a whole flows smoothly and logically from one idea to the next.It is useful to compare this essay to the level-3 essay presented next. Though both essays entail some surface-level discussion and often fail to probe deeply into the issue, this writer does take the analysis a step further. In paragraph 2, the distinction between this essay and the next one (the level-3 response) can most clearly be seen. To support the notion that advances in technology actually help increase thinking ability, the writer draws a clever parallel between the promise of modern, sophisticated technology (computer) and the actual impact of equally promising and pervasive technologies of the past (printing press).Like the analysis, the language in this essay clearly meets the requirements for a score of 4. The writer displays sufficient control of language and the conventions of standard written English. The preponderance of mistakes are of a cosmetic nature (trying to solve more complicating problems.) There is a sentence fragment (Going off ...) along with a comma splice (Our ability ... isnt deteriorating, its continuing to grow ...) in paragraph 3. However, these errors are minor and do not interfere with the clarity of the ideas being presented.新GREIssue 官方范文整理4Essay Response — Score 3There is no current proof that advancing technology willdeteriorate the ability of humans to think. On the contrary, advancements in technology had advanced our vast knowledge in many fields, opening opportunities for further understanding and achievement. For example, the problem of dibilitating illnesses and diseases such as alzheimers disease is slowing being solved by the technological advancements in stem cell research. The future ability of growing new brain cells and the possibility to reverse the onset of alzheimers is now becoming a reality. This shows our initiative as humans to better our health demonstrates greater ability of humans to think.One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds is the use of internet and cell phones. In the past humans had to seek out information in many different enviroments and aspects of life. Now humans can sit in a chair and type anything into a computer and get an answer. Our reliance on this type of technology can be detrimental if not regulated and regularily substituted for other information sources such as human interactions and hands on learning. I think if humans understand that we should not have such a reliance on computer technology, that we as a species will advance further by utilizing the opportunity of computer technology as well as the other sources of information outside of a computer. Supplementing our knowledge with internet access is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 3This essay never moves beyond a superficial discussion of the issue. The writer attempts to develop two points: thatadvancements in technology have progressed our knowledge in many fields and that supplementing rather than relying on technology is surely a way for technology to solve problems while continually advancing the human race. Each point, then, is developed with relevant but insufficient evidence. In discussing the potential of technology to advance knowledge in many fields (a broad subject, rife with possible examples), the writer uses only one limited and very brief example from a specific field (medicine and stem-cell research).Development of the second point is hindered by a lack of specificity and organization. The writer creates what might be best described as an outline. The writer cites a need for regulation/supplementation and warns of the detriment ofover-reliance upon technology. However, the explanation of both the problem and solution is vague and limited (Our reliance ... can be detrimental. If humans understand that we should not have such a reliance ... we will advance further). There is neither explanation of consequences nor clarification of what is meant by supplementing. This second paragraph is a series of generalizations that are loosely connected and lack amuch-needed grounding.In the essay, there are some minor language errors and a few more serious flaws (e.g., The future ability of growing new brain cells or One aspect where the ability of humans may initially be seen as an example of deteriorating minds). Despite the accumulation of such flaws, the writers meaning is generally clear. Thus, this essay earns a score of 3.新GREIssue 官方范文整理5Essay Response — Score 2In recent centuries, humans have developed the technology very rapidly, and you may accept some merit of it, and you may see a distortion in society occured by it. To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays. There are many symptoms and resons of it. However, I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinkng thoroughly.Of course, you can see the phenomena of human laziness along with developed technology in some place. However, they would happen in specific condition, not general. What makes human to be laze of thinking is not merely technology, but the the tendency of human that they treat them as a magic stick and a black box. Not understanding the aims and theory of them couses the disapproval problems.The most important thing to use the thechnology, regardless the new or old, is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them, and to adapt suit tech to tasks in need. Even if you recognize a method as a all-mighty and it is extremely over-spec to your needs, you can not see the result you want. In this procedure, humans have to consider as long as possible to acquire adequate functions. Therefore, humans can not escape from using their brain.In addition, the technology as it is do not vain automatically, the is created by humans. Thus, the more developed tech and the more you want a convenient life, the more you think and emmit your creativity to breakthrough some banal method sarcastically.Consequently, if you are not passive to the new tech, but offensive to it, you would not lose your ability to think deeply. Furthermore, you may improve the ability by adopting it.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 2The language of this essay is what most clearly links it to the score of 2. Amidst sporadic moments of clarity, this essay is marred by serious errors in grammar, usage and mechanics that often interfere with meaning. It is unclear what the writer means when he/she states, To be lazy for human in some meaning is one of the fashion issues in thesedays, or to adapt suit tech to tasks in need.Despite such severe flaws, the writer has made an obvious attempt to respond to the prompt (I can not agree with the statement that the technology make humans to be reluctant to thinking thoroughly) as well as an unclear attempt to support such an assertion (Not understanding the aims and theory of them [technology] couses the disapproval problems and The most important thing to use the thechnology ... is to comprehend the fundamental idea of them). On the whole, the essay displays a seriously flawed but not fundamentally deficient attempt to develop and support its claims.(Note: In this specific case, the analysis is tied directly to the language. As the language falters, so too does the analysis.)Essay Response — Score 1Humans have invented machines but they have forgot it and have started everything technically so clearly their thinking process is deterioating.Reader Commentary for Essay Response — Score 1The essay is clearly on topic, as evidenced by the writers usage of the more significant terms from the prompt: technically (technologically), humans, thinking (think) and deteriorating (deteriorate). Such usage is the only clear evidence of understanding. Meaning aside, the brevity of the essay (one sentence) clearly indicates the writers inability to develop a response that follows the specific instructions given (Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take).The language, too, is clearly level 1, as the sentence fails to achieve coherence. The coherent phrases in this one-sentence response are those tied to the prompt: Humans have invented machines and their thinking process is deteriorating. Otherwise, the point being made is unclear 新GREIssue 官方范文整理。
gre写作6分issue范文
gre写作6分issue范文Title: "The Value of Dissent in a Progressive Society"In any society that aims to progress and thrive, dissent is not just a right but an absolute necessity. It is like the grit in an oyster that has the potential to produce a pearl.Some might argue that dissent creates chaos and division. They look ata group of protesters chanting on the street and see only disorder. However, this view is as short sighted as a mole that can't see beyond its little hole. Dissent is often the first sign that there is something wrong in the system. For example, in the early days of the civil rights movement in the United States, the voices of those who dissented against segregation were initially seen as troublemakers. But in reality, they were the ones who had the courage to point out the blatant injustice of a society that treated people differently based on the color of their skin.Dissent also serves as a catalyst for innovation. Think about it. If everyone in a company or a community simply nodded their heads and agreed with every idea put forward, we would be stuck in a rut. It's the person who says, "Hey, that's a dumb idea. Why don't we try this instead?" whooften pushes the boundaries. For instance, in the world of technology,Steve Jobs was known for his ability to dissent from the common thinking of the time. When most computer companies were focused on making big, bulky machines for businesses, Jobs had the vision to think that personal computers could be sleek, user friendly, and designed for the averageperson at home. His dissent from the established norms led to the creationof Apple products that have revolutionized the way we communicate, work,and live.Moreover, dissent is an essential part of a democratic society. A democracy is not a dictatorship where one voice rules all. It is a chorus of voices, and dissent ensures that all voices are heard, not just the loudest or the most popular. When citizens are allowed to dissent, they are participating in the shaping of their own society. They are saying, "We are part of this, and we have a say in how it runs." It's like a big, messy family dinner where everyone has the right to speak their mind, even if it means disagreeing with the family patriarch or matriarch.However, dissent should not be confused with mindless opposition. There is a difference between having a well thought out, reasoned dissent andjust being contrarian for the sake of it. The former is like a surgeon's scalpel, precise and aimed at cutting out the diseased parts of society. The latter is like a wild, flailing sword that can cause more harm than good.In conclusion, a society that values progress should embrace dissent with open arms. It should encourage its citizens to speak up when they see something wrong, to question the status quo, and to offer alternative solutions. Because in the end, it is through the healthy exchange of different opinions, even those that are uncomfortable and unpopular, that a society can truly move forward and reach new heights. It's like a ship sailing on the ocean. Dissent is the wind that can either capsize the ship if it's uncontrolled, but if harnessed correctly, it can take the ship to uncharted and wonderful destinations.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
新GRE写作Issue模板
——By Jason Lee
一、作文步骤
1.审题(1min)
2.首段(5min)
3.构思+提纲(2min)
4.中间段+尾端(20min)
5.检查润色(2min)
二、题型
1.表态+论述(statement/ recommendation/ challenge/ policy)
2.讨论(both of views)
3.因果分析(claim+ reason)
三、模板
1.表态+论述(statement/ recommendation/ challenge/ policy)
◆首段：
Never in the history of humanity have we witnessed such a great accentuation on…（时间+话题关键词+矛盾性）
What especially concerns the public involves whether…（矛盾核心）
It is my personal conviction that…for reasons as follows. （表态）
◆中间段：
(1)One compelling argument is that…（提出论点）
The threshold matter inherent in the issue of…is that…
It is a truth of prevalent recognition that…（扩展论证）
(2)Another indispensable part of my argument is that…
Common sense informs us that…
(3)Nevertheless, it is of vital prominence not to disregard the fact that…
It is logically justifiable to hold that…
◆尾段：
In the final analysis, （转述观点+引述结束）
2.讨论(both of views)
◆首段：
Never in the history of humanity have we witnessed such a great accentuation on…（时间+话题关键词+矛盾性）
Proponents of… (this issue) claim that…while opponents contend that…（转述双方观点）
◆中间段：
(1)One compelling argument advocated by the proponents is that… (A方论点1+扩展论证)
The proponents as well hold that…（A方观点2+扩展论证）
(2)On the contrary, what the opponents insist to argue is that（B方论点1+扩展论证）Besides, the opponents are of the opinion that…（B方论点2+扩展论证）
◆尾段：
Weighing the two claims against each other, it is my personal conviction that…
（表态：A/B）
The threshold matter inherent in the issue of… is that…（A/B方论点3）
3.因果分析(claim+ reason)
◆首段：
Never in the history of humanity have we witnessed such a great accentuation on…（时间+话题关键词+矛盾性）
The speaker claims that…by pointing out that…（转述题设，reason推claim）
◆中间段：
(1)Admittedly, there is some true element in holding that… (reason推claim的正确性+论证)
Conversely, to the extent of my observation, to say that…is logically unjustifiable.（转折+表态）
(2)Although… we must cast doubt on that…（质疑reason+论证）
While… we must sometimes confess that （让步+质疑reason推claim+论证）Finally, it is unreasonable to skip the scrutiny of the speaker’s conclusion that…（质疑claim+论证）
◆尾段：
It is my personal conviction that…（表态）
（论证）。