GRE作文ISSUE满分范文
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。
GREissue写作范文
GREissue写作范文我给大家整理了GRE issue写作范文，盼望大家可以借鉴里面的短语、句子或思路，给自己的写作找一些思路和灵感,下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。
GRE issue写作范文：冒险与方案题目：Success in any realm of life comes more often from taking chances or risks than from careful and cautious planning.在生活的全部领域中，胜利往往更多的来自于把握机会或者冒险而不是通过认真谨慎的方案。
正文：The speaker asserts people are more likely to attain success when taking chances or risks than planning carefully and cautiously. However, after comparing the characteristics of careful planning and taking chances, I strongly hold that they are of the same importance in the pursuit of success.In competitive sports, while making appropriate training plans and effective competition strategies constitute necessary conditions of winning the matches, taking risks is almost inevitable when athletes or their coaches confront a sudden matter that might influence the course of a match and that has not been taken into consideration beforehand. In modern competitive sports, it is widely acknowledged that scientific and effective training contributes to athletes’ better performance during matches. Good competition strategies, on the other hand, resulting in the better allocation of physical force, better use of skills or the higher rate inscoring, also play a vital role.However, when the star players of a soccer team or a basketball team are off the game or fail to implement their chief coachs strategic intention, leaving the whole team in adverseness, the coach faces the choice whether to substitute he/she or not. No doubt substituting a star player with a bench player means taking risk because the bench player may not perform as good as the star player and may make matters worse. If this happens, the substitution will incur discontentment of the players and critique from the teams fans, media and the boss. The capability of the coach may then be suspected and he/she may even be fired. Nevertheless, if the coach dares not to take the risk to substitute a poorly performed star player, his/her team will probably lose the game. Taking chances and risks is reasonable when one is dealing with something that has not been taken into consideration previously. So, in competitive sports, planning and risking are both necessary.In academic fields, careful and cautious planning is required for large projects and application disciplines while revolutionary scientific breakthroughs are almost impossible without taking chances or risks. Before starting the research project on human genome, scientists had already made plans on the content and method of the research. They did not have to take any chances or risks because all they should do have already been carefully planned. There were no technical obstacles that had not been solved. Therefore, they just followed the plan step by step and accomplished the project in the end. As for significant scientific breakthroughs, they are the important discoveries and theories that disaccord, at least to some extent, with established principles or our intuitions, such as the Theory of Relativity and quantum mechanics. One has no choice but to take chances because established theories may not be applicable on the boundary of what is known and what is unknown. Only after being examined through experiments, practices and observations, can they be confirmed or belied. In a word, planning and taking chances or risks are different means for different levels of academic researches.In the business world, cautious planning contributes to the long-term development of a company and at the same time, risking is imperative for a company to survive, develop and thrive in the highly competitive society. Planning carefully on inquiring market, training stuff and manufacturing products ensure a companys long-term development by keeping its profit increasing or at least not declining. On the other hand, taking risks, such as incorporating with another company, involving in the market fields that have already been occupied by other enterprises or involving in the market fields that are not considered so profitable, is also necessary because these may save the company from the adversity or help to set foot in new businesses. Clearly,in the business field, planning and risking complement each other.To conclude, success in any realm of life comes equally from taking chances or risks and from careful and cautious planning. In most cases, they complement each other and pave the way towards success.GRE Issue写作优秀实例：达到目标的手段题目：If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.只要值得，不择手段达到目的是合理的。
新GREIssue官方范文整合
新GREIssue官方范文整合想要提高新GREIssue 的分数，多看官方范文是必须的，快来一起学习吧。
下面就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
新GREIssue 官方范文1Issue test 4“A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.”Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree ordisagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position youtake. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not beadvantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.Essay Response – Score 6Nations should not require that all students study the same national curriculum. If every child were presented with the same material, it wouldassume that all children learn the same and that all teachers are capable of teaching the same material in the same way. In addition to neglecting differences in learning and teaching styles, it would also stifle creativityandcreate a generation of drones. The uniformity would also lend itself to governmental meddling in curriculum that could result in the destruction ofdemocracy. If every teacher is forced to teach a certain text, the governmentneed only change that text to misinform an entire generation. Lastly, a standardized curriculum would also adversely affect students who come from lowerincome families or families who have little education as they might not have asmany resources for learning outside of school.Children all learn in very different ways. If the curriculum is standardized completely, it leaves little room for exploratory learning. Onechild may learn how to spell from reading, another may learn from phonics. Ifthe curriculum is standardized, suppose one aspect is dropped, that may excludecertain children from learning adequately. This is not to say of course that there shouldn’t be requirements, but they should be general requirements, notsomething so specific as a curriculum. Especially at the high school level thiswould be detrimental to the variety of subjects that a student can learn. Standards and the “No Child Left Behind” act in America are already forcing thereduction in programs such as art and music that have a less defineable curriculum. Additionally, education systems are rarely funded well enough toachieve the general goal of educating children. If a national curriculum wereimplemented, would it come with a significant increase in financial support?History suggests that it would not.Teachers also have different methods of teaching; if say, the English curriculum of all high schools were standardized, then a book that one teacherteaches excellently and therefore inspires students to read more and learn ontheir own might be eliminated, and although that teacher ought to be capableenough to teach the curriculum books, his or her students will still be missingout on what might have been a great learning experience. It also limits how muchof the teacher’s unique knowledge he or she can bring to the classroom. It isthese inspirational books or experiences that allow teachers to reach students;if they are put in a mold, the quality of teaching and learning will go down.Learning should be enjoyable and children and adolescents should be taughtnot only the curriculum in school, but that the body of knowledge that exists inthe world today is enormous and that you can learn your whole life. Having anational curriculum implies that there is a set group of things worth learningfor every person. Maybe this is true, but for students, it sets up a world wherethere is a finite amount of knowledge to be acquired for the purpose of regurgitating it on a test. Teaching a standard curriculum doesn’t encourageinquiries; it doesn’t make students ask questions like, “Why?” and“How?”School’s real purpose is teaching people to learn, not just teaching them a setgroup of facts. By teaching them to learn, students can continue doing so, theycan extend skills from one area of knowledge to another. This type of learningfosters creativity that can be used not only in math or science or English, butin art or music or creative writing. Teaching a brain to go beyond being a filecabinet for facts is the best way to teach creativity. Creativity is too often assumed to be something only for the arts. It is creativity that results in innovation and it is innovation that has resulted in the greatest achievementsof humanity in the sciences and humanities alike.Finally, the education system of a country is designed to put all childrenon a level playing field. Though this is only an ideal, it is a noble ideal. If the school curriculum becomes standardized, children who have highly educatedparents, or more money to buy books outside of school, or more resourcesfortutors or private schools will immediately gain a foothold. Poorer students fromuneducated families in the current American school system are already at adisadvantage, but at least now there is hope through variety that something canreach out to them and inspire them. There is hope that they can find a classthat interests them. If the curriculum becomes rigid and standardized, it is these disadvantaged students who fall through the cracks.There are many reasons not to standardize the curriculum. The uniqueness ofstudents and teachers is the most obvious, but students from less educated backgrounds will suffer the most. The creativity of a nation as a whole wouldfall with a standardized curriculum. Most importantly though is the question ofwho and what? Who chooses the curriculum? What is important enough that it mustbe taught? These questions assume that there is some infallible committee thatcan foresee all and know what knowledge will be important in everyone’s lives.There is no person, no group, no comittee capable of deciding what knowledge isnecessary. Curriculum should have standards, not be standardized and educationshould be as much about knowledge as it about learning to learn.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 6This outstanding response develops an articulate and insightful positionrejecting the prompt’s recommendation of a national curriculum. The writerunderstands a national curriculum to mean both the material that is taught andthe way it is taught. The essay offers a wide-ranging discussion of the practical and theoretical implications of a national curriculum for students,for teachers, and for a nation. For example, the response argues that prescribing particular content and teaching methods might make it more difficultfor teachers to tailor lessons to students with different learning styles and might also force effective teachers to adopt teaching methods that are lesseffective for them and their students. Although the essay clearly rejects therecommendation for a national curriculum, the writer does concede that there isa need for educational standards that are flexible enough to allow for individual, socioeconomic, and regional differences.The response maintains a well-focused, wellorganized discussion, developingeach point fully and connecting ideas logically without relying on obvioustransitional phrases. The writing is fluent, despite minor errors in grammar andmechanics; sentence structure is varied and diction is effective. In sum, thisresponse meets all of the criteria for a score of 6.新GREIssue 官方范文2Essay Response – Score 5While it may be to the advantage of a nation that all its students learnthe same basic information, this can be accomplished without going to the lengths of having a national curriculum. By requiring that all students know acertain amount in basic areas of knowledge without specifying the details, anation can achieve the same benefits of a national curriculum without undulydenying the freedom of teachers to teach as they see fit. A system of simplenational standards is good enough. To go further and create a full-fledged national curriculum would gain nothing and impair the ability of teachers.It is important to ensure that all students learn the fundamentals of different subject areas. In order to graduate from high school, for example, allstudents should have a good understanding of algebra, of basic concepts inscience and history, and an ability to read critically. These are skills that will benefit people in all kinds of different careers. Even if you never manipulate an equation after graduating from high school, you will have a farbetter understanding of the world around you if you know simple facts of mathand science. Fields such as English and history are even more important, as theyare absolutely necessary to maintain an informed citizenry capable ofmakingimportant decisions that all citizens of a democracy are called upon to make. Inorder to achieve this, it is necessary to have national standards of education.Most teachers are very capable of imparting knowledge on students, and mostschool boards are similarly well-intentioned. Nevertheless, without nationalstandards, some students are bound to fall through the cracks, and some schoolboards, under pressure from groups of parents, may eliminate certain subjectmatter from schools, as has happened recently with the teaching of evolution inconservative areas of the United States. In order to ensure that all students learn all that they need to know as functioning adults, some kind of nationalstandards should be in place.These national standards, however, need not go so far as to constitute asingle national curriculum. No one knows a class of students better thanitsteachers, and no one else can shape a curriculum for their maximum benefit. Anational curriculum would necessarily mean a one-size-fits-all approach, andwhat is appropriate in one classroom may not be in another. Partly this is aresult of the intellectual levels of the students in question: some may be ableto learn far more about a particular subject than others. But it is also a question of student goals. The desire for specialization begins before college.A student who wants to become an auto mechanic should be able to take auto shopclasses, classes which would not be of interest to a future lawyer or scientist.This notion may sound unacceptably elitist in today’s climate in which a collegeeducation has become almost an automatic goal of education, but it does not needto be this way. Students with limited interest in higher education should beable to opt out, to follow another curriculum that is more likely to lead to happiness later in life. As a society, we should not discourage them, but ratherensure that there are enough highpaying jobs available for skilled laborers withhigh school diplomas.Everyone needs certain basic knowledge in order to function in societytoday. To this extent, we need national standards of instruction for students.But we do not need to cram every student into the same classes and force them tolearn what we think is best for them.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 5This strong response presents a generally thoughtful, well-developed analysis of the issue and conveys meaning clearly. The introductory paragraphclearly disagrees with the prompt’s recommendation: “By requiring that allstudents know a certain amount in basic areas of knowledge without specifyingthe details, a nation can achieve the same benefits of a nationalcurriculumwithout unduly denying the freedom of teachers to teach as they see fit.” Thewriter supports this position by first arguing for the necessity of national standards, citing the individual’s need for fundamental knowledge in core areas,and by asserting that such knowledge makes for an informed, thoughtful citizenry. The discussion furthers this argument by examining some of the disadvantages of a rigid national curriculum, namely the inability of a nationalcurriculum to accommodate students’individual needs and interests.The response develops its position with strong reasons and examples, thoughthese reasons and examples are not always fully developed. For example, theresponse asserts that kn owledge of English and history is “absolutely necessaryto maintain an informed citizenry” and that “in order to achieve this, it is necessary to have national standards of education,” but it never really explainshow or why national standards would result in better-informed citizens thanregional standards or a national curriculum would.The response maintains a clear focus and organization with clear and logical transitions. Although the response conveys ideas clearly and demonstrates facility with standard written English, it lacks the precision ofexpression necessary for the highest score. In sum, this response demonstratesall of the characteristics required to earn a score of 5.新GREIssue 官方范文3Essay Response – Score 4As an educator, this topic is quite controversial to me. By having one setcurriculum in the entire nation, students would be taught the same material.Students from the rural Texas will study the same thing as students in Brooklyn,NY and suburban Chicago. If they move from state to state, they will havecovered the same material and they would be able to participate in class rightaway. You could also say that all students should have learned the same material, for which they should all be equal and should have the sameopportunities. But it is unrealistic. I disagree with a national curriculum because all students are not the same, they have different interests, and thiscurriculum would not permit teachers to explore and teach to students interests.First, a curriculum that becomes nation wide is supposed to teach all students the same material and perhaps the same way. All seventh graders willhave to solve algebraic equations and then they will all be the same. But students are not the same. All children develop at different rates, they havedifferent abilities. One cannot expect a child from Uptown Manhattan to be doingthe same thing as the kids in southern Illinois. The conditions are different,they have different funding and quality of teachers. Parents involvement intheir childrens education is different and that would affect what the studentslearn.Besides having different abilities, the students have different interestsor necesities. In one part of the nation it may be important to learn trigonometry and calculus because it is a high tech area. They use many computers and there might be a big market for careers in that field, but in another part of the country it might be more important to learn about farmingand erosion. That the interest would be different. Teachers also need the freedom to teach what the students are interested in. If the kids want to knowabout the Chicano Movement, they should have the opportunity to learn about it,instead of learning about African American Civil Rights Movement. City kids areinterested in different things than kids rural areas, as well as kids from the East Coast and the West Coast.For these reasons I would have to disagree with a national curriculum.Children are different and they should have the right to learn about things theyare interested in. Teachers should have the freedom to teach what he/she thinksis more important or interesting to their students. Teachers should teach theirstudents, not a curriculum.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 4This response presents a competent analysis of the issue and conveys meaning with acceptable clarity. The writer begins by acknowledging some of theperceived strengths of a national curriculum but then disagrees with the prompt,arguing that “all students are not the same, they have different interests, andthis curriculum would not permit teachers to explore and teach to students interests.” The writer supports this position by suggesting tha t a standardizedapproach to education will fail to address the different types of students whomake up a nation’s youth; for instance, students in two different geographicalareas may be subject to different socioeconomic conditions as well as differentcultural attitudes toward the role of education. The writer continues exploringthe role of geography by pointing out that different areas naturally emphasizedifferent aspects of curriculum based upon regional concerns and that a nationalcurriculum would unfairly homogenize education.The response is adequately focused and organized, and although it containssome errors, it demonstrates sufficient control of language in order to expressits ideas.新GREIssue 官方范文4Essay Response – Score 3Until now, many countries have mandatory course for their students untilthey enter the college. It is beneficial to students to have same amout knowledge in their schools. Also, I agree this recommendation because thesereasons.Even if students have extraordinary abilities to study, it just will be some specific parts of academic fields. Generally, most ordiany students haveabilities to follow their study through their courses. For all students, if people want to be had same knowledge and same academic background, the nationalcurriculum is essential. Of course, some people don’t want to follow their mandatoyr courses so that someone takes privite classes in their house or takesa different class in other substituted schools. However, if students want to enter the college, they have to take a national test, for example, SAT. Like this test will require generalized knowledge until in the high school. For preparing this test, every students have to study requisited courses of SAT.Even though some students take privite courses, they also have to prepare theseclasses. Because of this, national curriculum is needed. If they do not need totake a test to enter the college, they won’t prepare these classes. However,until now, every college wants to accept to be experimented students so thatthey need standarized test for everybody. Recently, even though national curriculum is becoming a social issue to criticize its efficency, if governmentsdon’t change their policy about thier educational programs, it has to exist inthe education.However, the same national curriculum has some troubles. If one studentdoesn’t follow the same curriculum, this student will be fale to enter the college. The mandatory curriculum does not allow individual characteristics,some students who have surprisingly abilities for other fields, for example,playing chess, singing the classic song, and operating computer systems, willnot enter the college. So, we should consider this problem in the same nationalcurriculum.Nevertheless, the system of the education will not change to allow otherpossibilities, a nation has to require all of their students to study the same courses, until the college. It is related to educational systems so that it is difficult to decide whatever is right. However, while the current educaitonalsystem exist a nation, the country should require the same curriculum to itsstudents.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 3This response demonstrates some competence in analyzing the issue and inconveying meaning, but it is obviously flawed. The writer adopts a position ofagreement with the prompt, arguing that since higher education requires studentsto pass standardized exams, a curriculum which emphasized the same education forall students would be more conducive to passing college entrance exams and testssuch as the SAT. In the course of this argument, the writer does consider thatthe implementation of a national curriculum would remove the opportunity forstudents to explore areas of study outside their core coursework but argues thatthis loss can be made up during the students’university coursework.The response presents a clear position on the issue and develops that position with relevant reasons and examples, but it fails to convey ideas withacceptable clarity; it has problems in language and sentence structure that result in a lack of clarity. These frequent minor errors and occasionalmajorerrors in grammar, usage, and mechanics preclude the response from receiving anupper-half score. In order to merit a score of 4, this response would need todemonstrate better control of the conventions of standard written English.新GREIssue 官方范文5Essay Response – Score 2A nation should teach all it’s students the same national curriculum untilthey enter college so that can prepare for college. Allowing everyone to learnthe same curriculum will teach our society how to communicate with one another.This is a nation of equal opportunity and should be treated and taught equally.I believec that this would allows young individuals to get an better understanting of all different kinds of religions, culture,and society. All school teach the same history,but some may forcus more on what they feel isimportant then depending on where you are from.Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 2After agreeing with the prompt’s recommendation, this brief essay presentsa series of unsupported claims about education and culture. The discussion failsto develop any of these claims with relevant reasons and/or examples or to makelogical connections between them; as a result, the discussion is disorganizedand unfocused. The final sentence states that all schools “teach the same history,but some may forcus more on what they feel is important then dependingon where you are from.” As a result of the response’s frequent errors in language and sentence structure, it isn’t at all clear whether this statement isintended as an observation of current practices or a recommendation that historycurricula should be flexible enough to account for regional interests.Though this response does contain frequent errors and lacks sentencevariety, these flaws serve more to impede clarity than to interfere significantly with meaning. The essay is scored a 2 primarily because it is “seriously limited in addressing the specific task directions and inpresentingor developing a position on the issue.”Essay Response – Score 1No i disagree with recommendation becaus it is not compulsary to student tostudy same national curriculum until they enter college.Each and every student is own idea and family dream so,could not say likethat student study the same nation curriculum until they enter college.we createa enviroment to all student are go and come in different country so we shareover idea and comfortably leave with each other.It is very necessary to colobrate with each other we develope owr nationand different technology. We take a example of “SUNITA VILLIUM” she is aAmerican scientist work in “NASA” basically she is a INDIAN.But she complitestudy in USA.So,it is not necessary to studay in own national Curriculum .but we devlopeenvironment to student study with different country and devlope nation name andover parents name.Also develope support position it is very advantageous for student.sometime what happen student is intelligent but he/she not able to study well wedevelope some kind of facillity to student study well and he/she devlope overcountry.To conclude “A nation should not require all of its student to study thesame national curriculum until they entre college.”Reader Commentary for Essay Response – Score 1Although this essay is obviously attempting to respond to the prompt’srecommendation, its severe problems in language and sentence structure and itspervasive grammar, usage, and mechanics errors make it impossible to discernwhether the writer understands the recommendation made in the prompt. In fact,the only clear phrases in the response are those that are borrowed from theprompt. These fundamental deficiencies in analytical writing warrant a score of1.新GREIssue 官方范文整合。
GRE Issue 官方范文 3
GRE Issue 官方范文 3(2008-12-18 17:54:23)分类：ISSUE参考资料标签：ets gre issue教育新东方修锐英文写作英语学习ray来源ETSIssue test 3"Our declining environment may bring the people of the world together as no politician, philosopher, or war ever could. Environmental problems are global in scope and respect no nation's boundaries. Therefore, people are faced with the choice of unity and cooperation on the one hand or disunity and a common tragedy on the other."6、Cooperation---or Tragedy?The solution to the world's growing environmental problems may have to wait awhile. It has been said that "environmental problems are global and respect no nation's boundaries." Unfortunately, pollution and its consequences still fall to large measure on those least likely to do anything about it: poor countries willing to sacrifice anything in order to sit at the table with the world's wealthy.As far as the industrialized nations of the world are concerned, the world is a big place. Environmental destruction taking place outside their borders may sometimes be fodder for government pronouncements of concern, but few concrete actions. Deforestation of the Amazon, for instance, is of vital concern to all those who wish to continue breathing. But the only effective deterrent to this activity, the restriction of international aid money to those countries showing net deforestation, has been stalled in the United Nations by those unwilling to "interfere" in the internal politics of other nations.Because of the differential impact of polluting activities around the world, and even in different regions of a single country, many governments will undoubtedly continue to promulgate only modest environmental regulations. Costs to polluting companies will continue to carry as much weight as the benefit of a pollution-free environment. Particularly in the current political climate of the United States, the well-documented expense of today's pollution-control measures will be stacked against the unknown long-term effects of polluting acclivities. "Why should I spend millions of dollars a year, which causes me to have to raise the cost of my goods or eliminate jobs, if no one really knows if air pollution is all that harmful? Show me the proof, " an air polluting company may demand.Realistically, it won't be until critical mass is achieved that the hoped for "choice of unity and cooperation" will be a viable one. Only when the earth as a whole isso polluted that life itself becomes increasingly difficult for a majority of the world's people will there likely be the political will to force global environmental laws on governments worldwide. But the optimists (read: environmental activists) among us continue to believe that the world can be shown the error of its ways. They continue to point out that the sky is probably falling--or at least developing a big hole. The world, as a whole, ignores them.One would hope, however, that governments, perhaps through a strengthened U.N., could somehow be forced to realize that when the Earth reaches the critical mass of pollution, it may be too late to do anything about it. That would be a "common tragedy" indeed.COMMENTARYThis excellent response displays an in-depth analysis of the issue and superior facility with language.While acknowledging that environmental problems are serious and of global dimensions, the essay explores the complexity of international cooperation. Such cooperation, the essay argues, runs into a variety of problems, and the writer offers persuasive examples to support that point:-- the unwillingness of nations to "interfere" with other nations through political measures such as restriction of foreign aid-- inadequate environmental regulations, which are caused both by "the differential impact of polluting activities" between countries and regions and by the difficulty of comparing the "long-term effects of polluting activities" with the more easily documented, short-term costs of reducing pollution.The essay distinguishes itself in part by its excellent organization. The first paragraph analyzes the claim and announces the writer's position; the second and third paragraphs provide clear examples supporting that position. The skillful use of a quotation from a business person vividly illustrates the economic impact of pollution controls. The last two paragraphs bring a sense of closure to the essay by continuing the theme announced in the first paragraph -- that cooperation must wait until more dire circumstances produce the political will necessary to reduce pollution.The essay exhibits superior control of grammar and syntax, with only minor errors. Transitional phrases -- "because," "however," "for instance" -- help guide the reader through the argument. Also, effective sentence variety and the use of precise word choice help confirm the score of 6.。
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gre考试作文新题库issue精选5篇
新gre考试作文新题库issue精选5篇新gre考试作文新题库issue精选5篇新gre考试作文新题库解析issue1The best way to teach—whether as an educator, employer, or parent—is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones.无论是教育工作者、雇主，还是父母，教育的最佳方法是是赞扬积极的行为，忽视消极的行为。
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.讨论你在多大程度上同意或者不同意题目中的观点，在发展和支持你的立场时，确保使用那些最具说服力的原因和/或例证来挑战你所持有的立场。
新gre考试作文新题库解析issue2The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.现代生活的奢华和便利，让人们无法成为真正强大、独立的个体。
Write a response in which you 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.文章中讨论你是在多大程度上同意或者不同意题目的论点，并解释你选取这一立场的原因。
GREIssue高分范文
GREIssue高分范文想要更好的备考GRE写作考试，需要多看一些范文哦，小编整理了一些范文，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
GRE Issue高分范文"Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Students who have learned only facts have learned very little."The speaker makes a threshold claim that students who learn only facts learn very little, then condudes that students should always learn about concepts, ideas, and trends before they memorize facts. While I wholeheartedly agree with the threshold claim, the condusion unfairly generalizes about the learning process. In fact, following the speaker's advice would actually impede the learning of concepts and ideas, as well as impeding the development of insightful and useful new ones. Turning first to the speaker's threshold daim, I strongly agree that ifwe learn only facts we learn very little. Consider the task of memorizing the periodic table of dements, which any student can memorize without any knowledge of chemistry, or that the table relates to chemistry. Rote memorization of the table amounts to a bit of mental exercise-an opportunity to practice memorization techniques and perhaps learn some new ones. Otherwise, the student has learned very little about chemical dements, or about anything for that matter.As for the speaker's ultimate claim, I concede that postponing the memorization of facts until after one leams ideas and concepts holds certain advantages. With a conceptual framework already in place a student is better able to understand the meaning of a fact, and to appreciate its significance. As a result, the student is more likely to memorize the fact to begin with, and less likely to forget it as time passes. Moreover, in my observation students whose first goal is to memorize facts tend to stop there--for whatever reason. It seems that by focusing on facts first students risk equating the learning process with the assimilation of trivia; in turn, students risk learning nothing of much use in solving real world problems.Conceding that students must learn ideas and concepts, as well as facts relating to them, in order to learning anything meaningful, I nevertheless disagree that the former should always precede the latter--for three reasons. In the first place, I seeknow reason why memorizing a fact cannot precede learning about its meaning and significance--as long as the student does not stop at rote memorization. Consider once again our hypothetical chemistry student. The speaker might advise this student to first learn about the historical trends leading to the discovery of the elements, or to learn about the concepts of altering chemical compounds to achieve certain reactions--before studying the periodic table. Having no familiarity with the basic vocabulary of chemistry, which includes the informarion in the periodic table, this student would come away from the first two lessons bewildered and confused in other words, having learned little.In the second place, the speaker misunderstands the process by which we learn ideas and concepts, and by which we develop new ones. Consider, for example, how economics students learn about the relationship between supply and demand, and the resulting concept of market equilibrium, and of surplus and shortage. Learning about the dynamics of supply and demand involves (1) entertaining a theory, and perhaps even formulating a new one, (2) testing hypothetical scenarios against the theory, and (3) examining real-world facts for the purpose of confirming, refuting, modifying, or qualifying the theory. But which step should come first? The speaker would have us follow steps 1 through 3 in that order. Yet, theories, concepts, and ideas rarely materialize out of thin air; they generally emerge from empirical observations--i.e., facts. Thus the speaker's notion about how we should learn concepts and ideas gets the learning process backwards.In the third place, strict adherence to the speaker's advice would surely lead to illconceived ideas, concepts, and theories. Why? An idea or concept conjured up without the benefit of data amounts to little more than the conjurer's hopes and desires. Accordingly, conjurers will tend to seek out facts that support their prejudices and opinions, and overlook or avoid facts that refute them. One telling example involves theories about the center of the universe.Understandably, we ego-driven humans would prefer that the universe revolve around us.Early theories presumed so for this reason, and facts that ran contrary to this ego-driven theory were ignored, while observers of these facts were scorned and even vilified. In short, students who strictly follow the speaker's prescription are unlikely to contribute significantly to the advancement of knowledge.To sum up, in a vacuum facts are meaningless, and only by filling that vacuum with ideas and concepts can students learn, by gaining useful perspectives and insights about facts. Yet,since facts are the very stuff from which ideas, concepts, and trends spring, without some facts students cannot learn much of anything. In the final analysis, then, students should learn facts right along with concepts, ideas, and trends.GRE Issue高分范文The speaker asserts that rather than merely highlighting certain sensational events the media should provide complete coverage of more important events .While the speaker's assertion has merit from a normative standpoint,in the final analysis i find this assertion indefensible.Upon first impression the speaker's claim seems quite compelling ,for two reasons.First ,without the benefit of a complete, unfiltered, and balanced account of a current evnets ,it is impossible to develop an informed and intelligent opinion about important social and political issue and , in turn, to contribute meaningfully to our democratic society ,which relies on broad participation in an ongoing debate about such issues to steer a proper course.the end result of our being a largely uninformed people is that we relegate the most important decisions to a handful of legislators,jurists ,and executives who may not know what is best for us.Second,by focusing on the "sensational"-by which i take the speaker to mean comparatively shocking, entertaining , and titillating events which easily catch one's attention-from trashy talk shows and local news broadcasts to The National Enquixer and People Magazine.This trend dearly serves to undermine a society's collective sensibilities and renders a society's members more vulnerable to demagoguery; thus we should all abhor and resist the trend.However,for serveral reasons i find the media's current trend toward highlights and the sensational to be justifiable.First ,the world is becoming an increasingly eventful place;thus with each passing year it becomes a more onerous task for the media to attempt full news coverage.Second ,we are becoming an increasingly busy society.The average U.S.worker spends nearly 60 hours per week at work now;and in most families both spouses work. Compare this startlingly busy pace to the pace a generation ago,when one bread-winner worked just over 40 hours per week.We have far less time today for news, so highlights must suffice .third,the media does infact provide full coverage of important events;anyone can find such coverage beyond their newspaper's front page,on daily PBS news programs, and on the Internet.I would wholeheartedly agree with the speaker if the sensational highlights were all the media were willing or permited to provide;this scenario would be tantamount to thought control on a mass scale and would serve to undermine our free society.However , i am aware of no evidence of any trend in this direction.To the contrary,in my observation the media are informing us more fully than ever before;we just need to seek out that information.On balance,then, the speaker's claim is not behave-regardless of its merits from a normative standpoint begs the question.GRE Issue高分范文Long black coat, large sunglasses, face buried deeply down in the turned-up collar and hurried steps denying any attempt to stop them---no, don't be alarmed; this is not a criminal at large, but only a public figure escaping the voyeuristic eyes and cameras of omnipresent tabloid reporters.Yet it is only one side of the coin. When you come back home, what greets you in newspapers, on TV or on the Internet, are a sargasso sea of so-called exclusive news telling tales about privacies of public figures. Not only tabloids are selling what they find by voyeurism, public figures, especially singers, movie stars and such alike in show businesses, are also themselves brandishing their underwear, so as to attract the eyes and attention of the public and to remain in the spotlight.It is a human nature to have the propensity to pry into other people's lives, especially the private lives of famous public figures, for their public lives are all so shining, so different from those of ours, that we cannot help but want to know what they are really like in real daily life and if they too have such sorrows and happiness as those common to us. By peeping into the private lives of public figures, our curiosity is satisfied, our distance from those "shining guys shortened", and our self-assurance secured by knowing that those "shining guys", too, are no more than ordinary humans.Whereas those "shining guys", on the one hand, detest to be mixed up with ordinary human beings for they are naturally arrogant and supercilious--the inevitable by-products of fame and fortune--and strive to sustain their status and mystery, on the other hand, they have to please the public, for they know quite clearly that attentionof the public is the very basis of their fame and fortune, whatever the causes of that attention. Thus, having a private life or not having a private life should not be a big bother to singers and movie stars. Actually, they sometimes are themselves selling their privacies in exchange for fame and fortune.Yet for politicians, it is a different and a little bit complicated story. As leaders of our government, surely they have more significant responsibilities to shoulder and their behaviors matter more to the society and to every one of us. Considering the onerous tasks of politicians, should we, the public, and the mass media leave them alone and let them concentrate on their job, or thinking of the interests of the public, should the mass media act as a supervisor to those politicians and let the public be informed of their misdeeds?As officials elected by the public and paid for by the public, politicians should undoubtedly under the supervision of the public and answer for the public. And the public, surely enough, have the right to ask for honest dealings of all kinds of issues of the government. When a politician's private affairs, such as using what power he has to secure a higher position and a higher salary for his girl friend as the Director of the World Bank did, undermine the interests of the public, the public have the right to know such scandals and reconsider their faith been laid on the politician.But what complicates the problem is that mass media, a commercial institution, is not always so just and serves only the interests of the public and the society--its shareholders' interests have the first and foremost priority. As a result, reporters all too often pry into the private lives of politicians, trying to dig out something provocative that could serve to stimulate the public's appetite and skyrocket the sales of the newspaper.Private life of a politician is also a vital card in the hands of his opponents. During the presidential election, private lives of presidential candidates have been snooped, exposed, exaggerated, distorted, fabricated and attacked. President Clinton's affair with L. Monica almost costs him his presidency, while helps start his wife, Hilary Clinton's political career.All these cause pressure on politicians. Concededly, moderate pressure can help politicians remain high-spirited, discreet and prudent with their behaviors, too much pressure surely strains their nerves too much and thus undermines their energy and spirit, and therefore their working efficiency.However, a politician also takes advantage of his own private life to establish a wanted image of himself, to win him the critical vote, or to convey a particular political gesture. For instance, the former president of Argentina, Peron married 26-year old Evita, an actress who came from the lower rung of the social ladder, to indicate his determination to stand by the poor and fight for their rights, and this private affair won Peron hearts and faith of millions of peasants and, consequently, the presidency of Argentina.Thus, private lives of public figures are a two-edged sword--proper use of it could bring magnificent benefits for them, while abuse of it could leave them cut and injured, even fatally.GRE Issue高分范文"The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that everyone has more leisure time."The speaker contends that technology's primary goal should be to increase our efficiency for the purpose of affording us more leisure time. I concede that technology has enhanced our efficiency as we go about our everyday lives. Productivity software helps us plan and coordinate projects; intranets, the Internet, and satellite technology make us more efficient messengers; and technology even helps us prepare our food and access entertainment more efficiently. Beyond this concession, however, I find the speaker's contention indefensible from both an empirical and a normative standpoint.The chief reason for my disagreement lies in the empirical proof: with technological advancement comes diminished leisure time. In 1960 the average U.S. family included only one breadwinner, who worked just over 40 hours per week. Since then the average work week has increased steadily to nearly 60 hours today; and in most families there are now two breadwinners. What explains this decline in leisure despite increasing efficiency that new technologies have brought about? I contend that technology itself is the culprit behind the decline. We use the additional free time that technology affords us not for leisure but rather for work. As computer technology enables greater and greater office productivity it also raises our employers' expectations--or demands--for production. Further technological advances breed still greater efficiency and, in turn, expectations. Our spiraling work load is only exacerbated by the competitive business environment in which nearly allof us work today. Moreover, every technological advance demands our time and attention in order to learn how to use the new technology. Time devoted to keeping pace with technology depletes time for leisure activities.I disagree with the speaker for another reason as well: the suggestion that technology's chief goal should be to facilitate leisure is simply wrongheaded. There are far more vital concerns that technology can and should address. Advances in bio-technology can help cure and prevent diseases; advances in medical technology can allow for safer, less invasire diagnosis and treatment; advances in genetics can help prevent birth defects; advances in engineering and chemistry can improve the structural integrity of our buildings, roads, bridges and vehicles; information technology enables education while communication technology facilitates global participation in the democratic process. In short, health, safety, education, and freedom--and not leisure--are the proper final objectives of technology. Admittedly, advances in these areas sometimes involve improved efficiency; yet efficiency is merely a means to these more important ends.In sum, I find indefensible the speaker's suggestion that technology's value lies chiefly in the efficiency and resulting leisure time it can afford us. The suggestion runs contrary to the overwhelming evidence that technology diminishes leisure time, and it wrongly places leisure ahead of goals such as health, safety, education, and freedom as technology's ultimate aims.。
2024年GRE考试写作：Issue2
Because of television and worldwide computer connections, people can now become familiar with a great many places that they have never visited. As a result, tourism will soon become obsolete.
Admittedly, when many people question authority some societal harm might result, even if a social cause is worthy. Mass resistance to authority can escalate to violent protest and rioting, during which innocent people are hurt and their property damaged and destroyed. The fallout from the 1992 Los Angeles riots aptly illustrates this point. The authority which the rioters sought to challenge was that of the legal justice system which acquitted police officers in the beating of Rodney King. The means of challenging that authority amounted to flagrant disregard for criminal law on a mass scale--by way of looting, arson, and even deadly assault. This violent challenge to authority resulted in a financially crippled community and, more broadly, a turning back of the clock with respect to racial tensions across America.
- 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)。
GRE作文ISSUE满分范文
GRE作文ISSUE满分范文，希望可以给大家一些写作参考。
"Success, whether academic or professional, involves an ability to survive in a new environment and, eventually, to change it."
Many wonder the intrinsic impact of industrial revolution over the last century. Is it a blessing or a curse? Ever since the invention of steam engine, mass production enabled factories to make out products in a madly efficient manner, while machines also supplanted innumerous traditionally skilled artisan, forcing them out of work. Gone are the days when they boasted of their craftsmanship that they assumed to be able support their family all their life. Consumers became more aspiring to novel design instead of durability as goods were made to be discarded.
Hundreds years later, with the first installation of integrated circuit on the chip, another profound turnover took place. Now the computer pervades our life so much that one may find himself half illiterate in absence of input skill. This time, thousands of jobs were created in Silicon Valley, transforming some of the few into billionaire over one night. Nevertheless, the original inventor might not expect that the ensuing slow down and thus recession in IT sector would approach so soon in less than 10 years, which is obviously less than a presumable 15 years time normal for a periodical change.
Positive or negative, one mark that characterizes the technological bombardment indicates a constant fact: changes exist ubiquitously and operating at an ever-increasing tempo; those who fail to catch up with the torrent of change would ineluctably engulfed by billows, floating no where and eventually dissolve as negligible bubbles.
Favors as well as opportunities goes to who adapt to the contemporary trend. Fully recognizing this axiom, long before the scientists announced accomplishment of sketches of human genes or earlier successful cloning of Doris, candidates preparing for university admission have smelt the sense. Today, in the U.S., biology and its branch disciplines become the first choice for top students of senior high, determining that this subject, foretold as the third wave in technology, could bring them brilliant future as“Bill Gates”dreamt the same in the previous wave.
In addition to academic realm, respect would be paid to people who though deprived of their past secure professions, choose not to be a loser in the whimsical society. Like the artisans who lost jobs, a vast number of skilled laborer in China’s city of Wengzhou have undergone darkness and depressio n in those old days. However, after years of endeavor and refinement, they prove their value again. By accurately posit the economic trend and market demand, they play an active role in almost all economic sectors, garments, catering and lodging, hi-tech industry, you name it.
While ability honed in surviving the fickleness of the world makes the path through success shorter, it is essential for the more ambitious to acquire the pith of reformist and lead the trend. In this way, it could help him distinguish from the mediocracy and platitude. This is absolutely not an easy task. Inborn insight and foresight are needed to tell uncommon out of the commonplace; extraordinary perseverance
and encouragement is a must to face the coming challenges against his iconoclasm. Very few people crowned with triumph possess this quality, whether the Nobel Prize winner or those who makes coverage on the Times.
In sum, as shown in the course of history, success, whether academic or professional, involves an ability to surviving in a new environment and---, eventually, ---to change it. Now some elite persons have again forecast that another social change is impending. Are you ready for that?
上述就是一篇GRE作文ISSUE满分范文介绍，希望上述信息以供大家参考，更好地备考GRE考试。