中文字幕人妻色偷偷久久_天天鲁一鲁摸一摸爽一爽_最新亚洲人成网站在线观看_999久久久免费精品国产_久久精品丝袜高跟鞋

歡迎訪一網(wǎng)寶!您身邊的知識(shí)小幫手,專注做最新的學(xué)習(xí)參考資料!

GRE寫作:寫作范例有用嗎

一網(wǎng)寶 分享 時(shí)間: 加入收藏 我要投稿 點(diǎn)贊

今天小編給大家?guī)鞧RE寫作分類解析,希望能夠幫助到大家取得更好的成績,下面小編就和大家分享,來欣賞一下吧。

GRE寫作:分類解析

準(zhǔn)備時(shí),最重要的一個(gè)步驟在于熟悉題庫和認(rèn)真準(zhǔn)備提綱。對(duì)于立論文(Issue)而言,自己動(dòng)手?jǐn)M一份完整的提綱是很有必要的,當(dāng)然可以參考各種資料,但必須勤動(dòng)腦,想一想提綱的邏輯連續(xù)性。實(shí)際上,有偏向性、但又不要絕對(duì)化的思路才是最易上手的。

對(duì)于駁論文(Argument)而言,熟悉題庫更為重要。很多人覺得一個(gè)題目拿過來隨便就能挑出五六個(gè)錯(cuò)誤。正常情況下是這樣的,但的確有些難題若不事先好好準(zhǔn)備,五分鐘之內(nèi)能找出兩個(gè)錯(cuò)誤就不錯(cuò)了。在第一次考試時(shí),我正是因?yàn)樵跍?zhǔn)備時(shí)放掉了一道我只找出兩個(gè)錯(cuò)誤的題目,而在正式考試時(shí)恰恰碰到了這道題目,所以寫得很不好。

雖然邏輯作文滿分只有6分,可千萬別小看了它的重要性。從某種程度上來說,它是GRE作文的精華——因?yàn)镚RE考試的就是邏輯,用英語寫兩篇作文只是形式而已,主要目的就是考察你的邏輯分析水平。

寫駁論文有很多小竅門,如需要鍛煉出區(qū)別“事實(shí)”和“觀點(diǎn)”的能力,不論題目中所給的事實(shí)有多夸張都需認(rèn)為它是對(duì)的,不能攻擊,只能攻擊觀點(diǎn)中的邏輯漏洞;凡是跟統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字、統(tǒng)計(jì)方法有關(guān)的邏輯錯(cuò)誤都盡量不要攻擊,最多只能一筆帶過等等。

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?

accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

The?notion?that?protective?gear?reduces?the?injuries?suffered?in?accidents?seems?at?first?glance?to?be?an?obvious?conclusion.??After?all,?it?is?the?intent?of?these?products?to?either?provent?accidents?from?occuring??in?the?first?place?or?to?reduce?the?injuries?suffered?by?the?wearer?should?an?accident?occur.??However,?the?conclusion?that?investing?in?high?quality?protective?gear?greatly?reduces?the?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident?may?mask?other?(and?potentially?more?significant)?causes?of?injuries?and?may?inspire?people?to?over?invest?financially?and?psychologically?in?protective?gear.??

First?of?all,?as?mentioned?in?the?argument,?there?are?two?distinct?kinds?of?gear?-?preventative?gear?(such?as?light?reflecting?material)?and?protective?gear?(such?as?helmets).??Preventative?gear?is?intended?to?warn?others,?presumably?for?the?most?part?motorists,?of?the?presence?of?the?roller?skater.??It?works?only?if?the?"other"?is?a?responsible?and?caring?individual?who?will?afford?the?skater?the?necessary?space?and?attention.??Protective?gear?is?intended?to?reduce?the?effect?of?any?accident,?whether?it?is?caused?by?an?other,?the?skater?or?some?force?of?nature.??Protective?gear?does?little,?if?anything,?to?prevent?accidents?but?is?presumed?to?reduce?the?injuries?that?occur?in?an?accident.??The?statistics?on?injuries?suffered?by?skaters?would?be?more?interesting?if?the?skaters?were?grouped?into?those?wearing?no?gear?at?all,?those?wearing?protective?gear?only,?those?wearing?preventative?gear?only?and?those?wearing?both.??These?statistics?could?provide?skaters?with?a?clearer?understanding?of?which?kinds?of?gear?are?more?beneficial.??

The?argument?above?is?weakened?by?the?fact?that?it?does?not?take?into?account?the?inherent?differences?between?skaters?who?wear?gear?and?those?who?do?not.??If?is?at?least?likely?that?those?who?wear?gear?may?be?generally?more?responsible?and/or?safety?conscious?individuals.??The?skaters?who?wear?gear?may?be?less?likely?to?cause?accidents?through?careless?or?dangerous?behavior.??It?may,?in?fact,?be?their?natural?caution?and?repsonsibility?that?keeps?them?out?of?the?emergency?room?rather?than?the?gear?itself.??Also,?the?statistic?above?is?based?entirely?on?those?who?are?skating?in?streets?and?parking?lots?which?are?relatively?dangerous?places?to?skate?in?the?first?place.??People?who?are?generally?more?safety?conscious?(and?therefore?more?likely?to?wear?gear)?may?choose?to?skate?in?safer?areas?such?as?parks?or?back?yards.??

The?statistic?also?goes?not?differentiate?between?severity?of?injuries.??The?conclusion?that?safety?gear?prevents?severe?injuries?suggests?that?it?is?presumed?that?people?come?to?the?emergency?room?only?with?severe?injuries.??This?is?certainly?not?the?case.??Also,?given?that?skating?is?a?recreational?activity?that?may?be?primarily?engaged?in?during?evenings?and?weekends?(when?doctors'?offices?are?closed),?skater?with?less?severe?injuries?may?be?especially?likely?to?come?to?the?emergency?room?for?treatment.???

Finally,?there?is?absolutely?no?evidence?provided?that?high?quality?(and?presumably?more?expensive)?gear?is?any?more?beneficial?than?other?kinds?of?gear.??For?example,?a?simple?white?t-shirt?may?provide?the?same?preventative?benefit?as?a?higher?quality,?more?expensive,?shirt?designed?only?for?skating.??Before?skaters?are?encouraged?to?invest?heavily?in?gear,?a?more?complete?understanding?of?the?benefit?provided?by?individual?pieces?of?gear?would?be?helpful.

The?argument?for?safety?gear?based?on?emergency?room?statistics?could?provide?important?information?and?potentially?saves?lives.??Before?conclusions?about?the?amount?and?kinds?of?investments?that?should?be?made?in?gear?are?reached,?however,?a?more?complete?understanding?of?the?benefits?are?needed.??After?all,?a?false?confidence?in?ineffective?gear?could?be?just?as?dangerous?as?no?gear?at?all.??

Commentary??

This?outstanding?response?demonstrates?the?writer's?insightful?analytical?skills.??The?introduction,?which?notes?that?adopting?the?topic's?fallacious?reasoning?could?".??爄nspire?people?to?over?invest?financially?and?psychologically?in?protective?gear,"?is?followed?by?a?comprehensive?examination?of?each?of?the?argument's?root?flaws.??Specifically,?the?writer?exposes?several?points?that?undermine?the?argument:??

--?that?preventive?and?protective?gear?are?not?the?same?

--?that?skaters?who?wear?gear?may?be?less?prone?to?accidents?because????they?are,?by?nature,?more?responsible?and?cautious?

--?that?the?statistics?do?not?differentiate?by?the?severity?of?the????injuries?

--?that?gear?may?not?need?to?be?high-quality?to?be?beneficial??

The?discussion?is?smoothly?and?logically?organized,?and?each?point?is?thoroughly?and?cogently?developed.??In?addition,?the?writing?is?succinct,?economical,?and?generally?error-free.??Sentences?are?varied?and?complex,?and?diction?is?expressive?and?precise.???

In?sum,?this?response?exemplifies?the?very?top?of?the?6?range?described?in?the?scoring?guide.??If?the?writer?had?been?less?eloquent?or?provided?fewer?reasons?to?refute?the?argument,?the?paper?could?still?have?received?a?6.?

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

The?argument?presented?is?limited?but?useful.??It?indicates?a?possible?relationship?between?a?high?percentage?of?accidents?and?a?lack?of?protective?equipment.??The?statistics?cited?compel?a?further?investigation?of?the?usefulness?of?protective?gear?in?preventing?or?mitigating?roller-skating?related?injuries.??However,?the?conclusion?that?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment?would?"greatly?reduce.risk?of?being?severely?injured"?is?premature.??Data?is?lacking?with?reference?to?the?total?population?of?skaters?and?the?relative?levels?of?experience,?skill?and?physical?coordination?of?that?population.??It?is?entirely?possible?that?further?research?would?indicate?that?most?serious?injury?is averted?by?the?skater's?ability?to?react?quickly?and?skillfully?in?emergency?situations.??

Another?area?of?investigation?necessary?before?conclusions?can?be?reached?is?identification?of?the?types?of?injuries?that?occur?and?the?various?causes?of?those?injuries.??The?article?fails?to?identify?the?most?prevalent?types?of?roller-skating?related?injuries.??It?also?fails?to?correlate?the?absence?of?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment?to?those?injuries.??For?example,?if?the?majority?of?injuries?are?skin?abrasions?and?closed-head?injuries,?then?a?case?can?be?made?for?the?usefulness?of?protective?clothing?mentioned.??Likewise,?if?injuries?are?caused?by?collision?with?vehicles?(e.g.?bicycles,?cars)?or?pedestrians,?then?light-reflective?equipment?might?mitigate?the?occurences.??However,?if?the?primary?types?of?injuries?are?soft-tissue?injuries?such?as?torn?ligaments?and?muscles,?back?injuries?and?the?like,?then?a?greater?case?could?be?made?for?training?and?experience?as?preventative?measures.??

Commentary??

This?strong?response?gets?right?to?the?work?of?critiquing?the?argument,?observing?that?it?"indicates?a?possible?relationship"?but?that?its?conclusion?"is?premature."??It?raises?three?central?questions?that,?if?answered,?might?undermine?the?soundness?of?the?argument:??

--?What?are?the?characteristics?of?the?total?population?of?skaters??--?What?is?the?usefulness?of?protective?or?reflective?gear?in????preventing?or?mitigating?rollerskating-related?injuries??--?What?are?the?types?of?injuries?sustained?and?their?causes???

The?writer?develops?each?of?these?questions?by?considering?possible?answers?that?would?either?strengthen?or?weaken?the?argument.??The?paper?does?not?analyze?the?argument?as?insightfully?or?develop?the?critique?as?fully?as?required?for?a?6?paper,?but?the?clear?organization,?strong?control?of?language,?and?substantial?degree?of?development?warrant?more?than?a?score?of?4.?

221381
領(lǐng)取福利

微信掃碼領(lǐng)取福利

微信掃碼分享

Z范文網(wǎng)、范文協(xié)會(huì)網(wǎng)范文檔案館