GRE作文是中國學(xué)生比較頭痛的，經(jīng)常準(zhǔn)備很多時(shí)間最后還是只得到3.5。我之所以得到6分，個(gè)人認(rèn)為我的文風(fēng)比較淳樸扎實(shí)，有科學(xué)性，寫的思路比較廣(正、反、特)，字?jǐn)?shù)也比較多(I800+、A700+)。
第二篇文章：
The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.
In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.
For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.
Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.
And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.
Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.
原題邏輯順序：UC老師牛==〉UC學(xué)生牛==〉想牛就選擇UC
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training. 首先承認(rèn)UC的聲望看起來確實(shí)不錯(cuò)，算是部分的同意了原文的觀點(diǎn)，并簡短的展開論證說事因?yàn)槔蠋熍！ｋS后便指出還有他因，但是并沒有展開它因。(留到正文第一段來展開) The Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study. 這里指出論據(jù)的不充足。實(shí)際上是在攻擊原文的論據(jù)邏輯鏈。Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office? 給出了論證：提出兩個(gè)問題進(jìn)行質(zhì)疑?？荚囉脮?BR> The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable. BODY打頭第一段與開頭段第一句話對應(yīng)，具體提出了他因。同時(shí)，還注意到所讓步的內(nèi)容(老師牛學(xué)校就牛)仍然是一致的。質(zhì)疑：老師牛，就能提供牛的教育嗎? Unfortunately, this is often not the case. 一針見血的指出不是這么回事。 A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the library and research facilities, the physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the living arrangements on or off campus, and the facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.具體論證：還有其他的因素決定教育的水平的。論證方法為列舉他因。這里的論證給人的感覺就是列的東西多，而且細(xì)。
This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general. 這里對于原文中邏輯鏈中的論據(jù)不足進(jìn)行證明。實(shí)際上就是和開頭段后兩句話(只有兩個(gè)系不夠)相對應(yīng)，進(jìn)一步展開進(jìn)行證明原文的論據(jù)怎么不充分，我們要全面評估UC除了只知道提供的兩個(gè)系的信息外還要知道哪些。Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.
這里屬于復(fù)述原文，立好靶子做好準(zhǔn)備開始攻擊。More important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.
Are the teaching faculty approachable? Are they helpful? Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge? Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement? How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes? Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students? Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars? Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school? What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?一開始攻擊就一連問了十幾個(gè)問題，顯得很雄辯，這里問了這么多問題，核心只有一個(gè)，學(xué)校老師學(xué)生之間三角關(guān)系到底怎么樣。具體論證是先說師生關(guān)系(老師對待學(xué)生怎么樣，學(xué)生對待老師怎么樣)，再說學(xué)校和學(xué)生(學(xué)校給學(xué)生提供了哪些便利)，最后說學(xué)校和老師和學(xué)生的關(guān)系(老師通過學(xué)校為了提高給學(xué)生的教育提出了什么意見么).可以說是層層遞進(jìn)，還是很有章法的!論證手法為列舉他因。
What about that 75% employment record? 這里質(zhì)疑了邏輯鏈中的另一個(gè)論據(jù)，即畢業(yè)生找工作的數(shù)據(jù)也能推出學(xué)校牛。核心論證方法為質(zhì)疑假設(shè)，提出建議。Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do. 這里論證方法為質(zhì)疑假設(shè)(是否是工作在喜歡的專業(yè))，我觀察到這里并沒有給出質(zhì)疑后的結(jié)果的展開。也許作者認(rèn)為展開后的結(jié)果是不言而喻的所以就不再展開細(xì)說了。這就是作者大牛之處，他懂得駕馭知道什么地方說到多少就夠了，所以越是大牛的文章就越是短。這個(gè)文章就很短。而對于我們來說，它的論證思路是一定要接受，但是為了保險(xiǎn)起見，還是把每個(gè)論點(diǎn)發(fā)展完全比較好，比如在這里加上：要是他們不在自己的最喜歡專業(yè)工作，說明他們還是沒有足夠的實(shí)力讓自己喜歡的工作接受自己，從而說明母校的教育也沒有那么牛啊。我們論證的越充分，顯然就越有把握拿高分。A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.提出了建議，使得論證更有力。
The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education. 這篇文章在最后沒有肯定原文的初衷，而是不留情面的批評!這是要看具體題目的，像這樣的廣告，本來就沒有多么高尚的目的。而上一篇范文人家不管邏輯有多差，但人家總是抱著善良的一顆心，為了保護(hù)大家的生命安全啊!所以說，我們對于原命題的立意心里要有數(shù)。 Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.最后還是提出了整體的宏觀的建議改進(jìn)意見。
COMMENTARY
The writer of this outstanding response acknowledges that the University of Claria may "appear" to have a sterling reputation, but cogently argues that such a reputation is perhaps unwarranted in light of the thin and misleading information provided.
The essay's insightful critique targets several instances of unsound reasoning in the argument:
-- that the argument identifies academic achievements in only two departments;
-- that publications and research prove little about the quality of teaching at Claria; and
-- that the student employment statistic lacks specificity and may be entirely bogus.
The writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations, pointing out, for instance, that invitations for faculty to teach elsewhere may have been purposely arranged in order to temporarily remove them from campus and that the employed students may be "flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets."
In addition, the response perceptively analyzes many features -- omitted by the argument -- that could more convincingly make the case that Claria is "the obvious choice."
The essay suggests that the search for a quality education would, at least, need to investigate the teaching strengths of the faculty; ideally one would also ask about research facilities, the university's physical plant, availability of classes, even parking arrangements!
Although the fourth paragraph ("What about that 75% employment record?") interrupts this discussion, the essay is, on the whole, logically and effectively organized.
Each paragraph develops the central premise: that the argument is uncompelling because it fails to use more valid indices of educational quality.
The writing is succinct, graceful, and virtually error-free, distinguished by impressive diction ("kudos," "laudable," "engineered," "entice"), as well as syntactic sophistication.
For all of these reasons, the essay earns a 6
感謝您閱讀《argument全部官方范文分析(3) 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。
第二篇文章：
The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.
In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.
For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.
Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.
And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.
Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.
原題邏輯順序：UC老師牛==〉UC學(xué)生牛==〉想牛就選擇UC
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training. 首先承認(rèn)UC的聲望看起來確實(shí)不錯(cuò)，算是部分的同意了原文的觀點(diǎn)，并簡短的展開論證說事因?yàn)槔蠋熍！ｋS后便指出還有他因，但是并沒有展開它因。(留到正文第一段來展開) The Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study. 這里指出論據(jù)的不充足。實(shí)際上是在攻擊原文的論據(jù)邏輯鏈。Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office? 給出了論證：提出兩個(gè)問題進(jìn)行質(zhì)疑?？荚囉脮?BR> The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable. BODY打頭第一段與開頭段第一句話對應(yīng)，具體提出了他因。同時(shí)，還注意到所讓步的內(nèi)容(老師牛學(xué)校就牛)仍然是一致的。質(zhì)疑：老師牛，就能提供牛的教育嗎? Unfortunately, this is often not the case. 一針見血的指出不是這么回事。 A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the library and research facilities, the physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the living arrangements on or off campus, and the facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.具體論證：還有其他的因素決定教育的水平的。論證方法為列舉他因。這里的論證給人的感覺就是列的東西多，而且細(xì)。
This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general. 這里對于原文中邏輯鏈中的論據(jù)不足進(jìn)行證明。實(shí)際上就是和開頭段后兩句話(只有兩個(gè)系不夠)相對應(yīng)，進(jìn)一步展開進(jìn)行證明原文的論據(jù)怎么不充分，我們要全面評估UC除了只知道提供的兩個(gè)系的信息外還要知道哪些。Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.
這里屬于復(fù)述原文，立好靶子做好準(zhǔn)備開始攻擊。More important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.
Are the teaching faculty approachable? Are they helpful? Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge? Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement? How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes? Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students? Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars? Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school? What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?一開始攻擊就一連問了十幾個(gè)問題，顯得很雄辯，這里問了這么多問題，核心只有一個(gè)，學(xué)校老師學(xué)生之間三角關(guān)系到底怎么樣。具體論證是先說師生關(guān)系(老師對待學(xué)生怎么樣，學(xué)生對待老師怎么樣)，再說學(xué)校和學(xué)生(學(xué)校給學(xué)生提供了哪些便利)，最后說學(xué)校和老師和學(xué)生的關(guān)系(老師通過學(xué)校為了提高給學(xué)生的教育提出了什么意見么).可以說是層層遞進(jìn)，還是很有章法的!論證手法為列舉他因。
What about that 75% employment record? 這里質(zhì)疑了邏輯鏈中的另一個(gè)論據(jù)，即畢業(yè)生找工作的數(shù)據(jù)也能推出學(xué)校牛。核心論證方法為質(zhì)疑假設(shè)，提出建議。Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do. 這里論證方法為質(zhì)疑假設(shè)(是否是工作在喜歡的專業(yè))，我觀察到這里并沒有給出質(zhì)疑后的結(jié)果的展開。也許作者認(rèn)為展開后的結(jié)果是不言而喻的所以就不再展開細(xì)說了。這就是作者大牛之處，他懂得駕馭知道什么地方說到多少就夠了，所以越是大牛的文章就越是短。這個(gè)文章就很短。而對于我們來說，它的論證思路是一定要接受，但是為了保險(xiǎn)起見，還是把每個(gè)論點(diǎn)發(fā)展完全比較好，比如在這里加上：要是他們不在自己的最喜歡專業(yè)工作，說明他們還是沒有足夠的實(shí)力讓自己喜歡的工作接受自己，從而說明母校的教育也沒有那么牛啊。我們論證的越充分，顯然就越有把握拿高分。A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.提出了建議，使得論證更有力。
The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education. 這篇文章在最后沒有肯定原文的初衷，而是不留情面的批評!這是要看具體題目的，像這樣的廣告，本來就沒有多么高尚的目的。而上一篇范文人家不管邏輯有多差，但人家總是抱著善良的一顆心，為了保護(hù)大家的生命安全啊!所以說，我們對于原命題的立意心里要有數(shù)。 Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.最后還是提出了整體的宏觀的建議改進(jìn)意見。
COMMENTARY
The writer of this outstanding response acknowledges that the University of Claria may "appear" to have a sterling reputation, but cogently argues that such a reputation is perhaps unwarranted in light of the thin and misleading information provided.
The essay's insightful critique targets several instances of unsound reasoning in the argument:
-- that the argument identifies academic achievements in only two departments;
-- that publications and research prove little about the quality of teaching at Claria; and
-- that the student employment statistic lacks specificity and may be entirely bogus.
The writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations, pointing out, for instance, that invitations for faculty to teach elsewhere may have been purposely arranged in order to temporarily remove them from campus and that the employed students may be "flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets."
In addition, the response perceptively analyzes many features -- omitted by the argument -- that could more convincingly make the case that Claria is "the obvious choice."
The essay suggests that the search for a quality education would, at least, need to investigate the teaching strengths of the faculty; ideally one would also ask about research facilities, the university's physical plant, availability of classes, even parking arrangements!
Although the fourth paragraph ("What about that 75% employment record?") interrupts this discussion, the essay is, on the whole, logically and effectively organized.
Each paragraph develops the central premise: that the argument is uncompelling because it fails to use more valid indices of educational quality.
The writing is succinct, graceful, and virtually error-free, distinguished by impressive diction ("kudos," "laudable," "engineered," "entice"), as well as syntactic sophistication.
For all of these reasons, the essay earns a 6
感謝您閱讀《argument全部官方范文分析(3) 》一文，出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)(liuxue86.com)編輯部希望本文能幫助到您。