gre寫作考試是很多學(xué)子的提分重點，你知道如何進行g(shù)re寫作考試練習(xí)嗎?提升gre考試分?jǐn)?shù)還需要這四種方法，下面小編就和大家分享gre寫作考試提分還要注意方式方法，希望能夠幫助到大家，來欣賞一下吧。

gre寫作考試提分還要注意方式方法

gre寫作考試練習(xí)題：

為了達(dá)到公平，在考試中公布所有的寫作試題，以達(dá)到能力和本土。

演講者互相競爭?？忌鷳?yīng)在考試前預(yù)習(xí)所有試題(節(jié)省考試時間)，通過撰寫100-150篇大綱了解GRE寫作的總體結(jié)構(gòu)，通過撰寫30-50篇文章練習(xí)寫作思路和表達(dá)方式。練習(xí)題里的試題越熟練，考試就越好。

gre寫作考試以計件方式進行評估：

每個評論員都很快地評論你的文章。不可能把每一個細(xì)節(jié)都看得很仔細(xì)?？忌鷳?yīng)迎合閱卷人的閱卷思維，gre寫作方法, gre備考要多久用最規(guī)范的結(jié)構(gòu)和最清晰的表達(dá)方式來反映自己的思維：第一段要明確提出自己的觀點，中間段要打開，每段的開頭應(yīng)該是該段的主題句。

GRE寫作得分是整體得分：

首先，根據(jù)公布的各評分環(huán)節(jié)的評分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，評分主要集中在以下三個方面：1)邏輯分析能力(洞察力要求);2)條理清晰的要求;3)語言能力(標(biāo)準(zhǔn)書面英語;簡明要求;可變結(jié)構(gòu)要求)。

但也強調(diào)，評級是整體性的，而不是從各個角度分別打分。這說明，雖然中國考生的語言能力較弱，但只要能從另外兩個角度給評論員一個非常深刻的感受，就可以得到6分。因此，在短時間內(nèi)努力提高語言能力的同時(語言能力的培養(yǎng)不能在一兩天內(nèi)完成)，在復(fù)習(xí)時要盡量對題目進行透徹的分析，學(xué)習(xí)高分作文的結(jié)構(gòu)，迅速提高總分通過對這兩個方面的突破。

GRE寫作的兩部分在總分中的權(quán)重相同：

由于aa的寫作不涉及自身觀點的發(fā)展，只需要指出作者的邏輯漏洞，因此經(jīng)過訓(xùn)練后寫作并不困難;而ai的寫作則需要發(fā)展自己的觀點，不僅需要邏輯洞察力，還需要展示觀點的能力，而且語言組織能力強，gre寫作方法, gre備考要多久所以對中國考生來說很難。在這段時間里，情況有了很大改善。但是，這兩部分在總分中的權(quán)重是一樣的，所以考生的策略應(yīng)該是盡量提高人工智能部分的寫作能力，盡量保持人工智能部分的滿分(或高分)。

因為如果AA部分滿分，AI部分只需爭取4分以上，就能保證作文總分在5分以上。其次，的評分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和作文評分的計算，參照了的夸大模型。我們很容易發(fā)現(xiàn)，在評分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)上，議題和論點都有共同點：一是觀點要深刻，論點要有說服力;二是組織要有條理，表達(dá)要清晰準(zhǔn)確;三是語言流暢，句型復(fù)雜，詞匯豐富。這三者分別是關(guān)于文本的“思想性”、“結(jié)構(gòu)性”和“表現(xiàn)性”。大多數(shù)高分考生在這三個方面表現(xiàn)都很好。從這里入手，采用“各個擊破”的方法，剖析GRE作文的精髓，從而得到一個理想的分?jǐn)?shù)，這是很自然的。

GRE寫作高分范文：權(quán)威問題

Much of the information that people assume is‘factual’actually turns out to be inaccurate. Thus，any piece of information referred to as a‘fact’should be mistrusted since it may well be proven false in the future.

大多數(shù)人們認(rèn)為是事實的信息結(jié)果實際上都是不準(zhǔn)確的。因此，任何據(jù)稱是事實的信息都應(yīng)該被質(zhì)疑，因為它在將來很可能會被證明為是錯誤的。

GRE寫作范文：

Should we be doubtful to all the information at hands because the rightness of which is uncertain? The speaker claims so，I concede that people often commit various fallacies in the course of cognizing things，however I fundamentally take exception of the arguer's assertion to mistrust every fact we might encounter. And I will substantially discuss my views thereinafter.

To begin with，the speaker seems to implicate that a fact would be proven false in the future under numerous circumstance. Nevertheless I prefer to arguer that facts never change. No matter how did the Medieval Church and Inquisition persecute Bruno，the fact never changes that the earth is far from being the center of the universe as the religious sovereigns had assumed or hoped for，while just a minor particle in it. Equally，no matter how Edison had tried to incite the public fear and distrust to the alternative current electricity，the fact never changes that Teals’ electrical system is vastly superior to his direct current electrical one，and would be accepted and applied in larger range.

However，what do change are the human's objective interpretations to facts. One compelling argument to this point is that，due to the limitation of human’s knowledge and comprehensive capability，they tend to make insufficient or even false understanding to the certain fact. An apt illustration is the changes of

cognition to disease. While at the ancient time，our progenitors believed the a man becoming a patient for the reason that he had conduct crimes or offended some ghosts or spirits，the contemporary people have well know that the varies of pathogens are the basic causes to our diseases，and the defects of our immune system and so forth are also the factors as well. Another argument for the change of comprehension to fact is that different people always observe and interpret from different perspectives. Though the Relativity theory is not well compliable with the Quantum mechanism，no one call the greatness of both Einstein and Bohr，because their theories are based on distinct views，the former from the macrocosm and the later from the microcosm.

Notwithstanding the foregoing reasons for that human tend to make fallacies during the cause of comprehending and cognizing facts，these reasons should never be the excuses to doubt every conclusion we might draw from facts. Based on certain rational inference and proper knowledge fundament，the conclusions we make might well be justifiable，if not completely right，to certain degree. What we need to do is to promote the enterprise of pursuing the better answer and try to use the result we have get to application，instead of wasting our time to undue doubt and suspicion. Though the medical scientists have not fully understood the mechanism of how the does the implanted organ interact with the wounded body，they are not refrain from using the implanting skill to save patients，of course the precondition or which is that this technology is much well established than the fundamental theory.

GRE寫作高分范文：過度專業(yè)化問題

GRE寫作題目：

“Academic disciplines have become so specialized in recent years that scholars' ideas reach only a narrow audience. Until scholars can reach a wider audience，their ideas will have little use.”

近些年來，學(xué)科已經(jīng)細(xì)化到了相當(dāng)?shù)某潭纫灾劣趯W(xué)者們的理念只影響小范圍的人群。除非學(xué)者們能擁有影響等大范圍的人群，否則他們的理念將幾乎毫無用處。

GRE寫作范文：

Although academic disciplines have become so specialized in recent years，scholars' ideas can still reach a wide audience by the advantage of the knowledge structure. We can simply put that it is the human beings' knowledge structure that makes it possible for a scholar's ideas in his specialized discipline to reach a much wider audiences who don't necessarily belong to his own discipline.

The reason why I draw this conclusion will be illustrated by recalling the process of social evolution.

During the passed centuries，the social economy has been greatly boosted by the revolutions in science and technology，which in turn increases the width and depth of academic disciplines to solve unencountered and more complex problems arising in the new situations. To solve new problems，we probably need new methods. That will undoubtedly calls for invention of new ideas，which will certainly adds to human beings' knowledge. Thus with the progress of science and technology，more and more knowledge will be added to the old system. A new problem will come： how the newly obtained knowledge is organized. This problem will be clear when we make classification of the new knowledge according to the old knowledge system. If there is content of the newly-get that doesn't properly belong to any sort of the old system，it means a

new discipline will emerge. But could we just assert that the newly formed discipline doesn't possess any relationship with any of the old ones? Certainly not. This is because the new knowledge is obtained through the old methods，which obviously means the new knowledge do have some connections with some old disciplines，otherwise I am quite sure we could not find it!

From the above，we can easily reach the conclusion that every academic discipline has certain relationships with some other ones. The structure of human's knowledge is just like the complexity of a net! And also it is a natural trend that academic disciplines become more and more specialized.

With the depositing and specializing process of knowledge，it causes humans to accommodate themselves to this situation. Because the God gives every person a limited time and energy，it is necessary for a person，who wants to make progress in his discipline，to adjust his knowledge structure to adapt to his research domain，that is to say，to be more devoted to his own research area. On the other hand，if he cares too much for unrelated or less related area，he will probably not be able to bring innovation to his main academic discipline. Simply put，we almost cannot find a man who constructs the Theory of Relativity and in the mean time composes symphony like Mozart's! So we can say every scholar must be more devoted to his own discipline than to others，but a wider knowledge of other disciplines sometimes involuntarily invokes sparks of new ideas.