如何从评分标准入手备考GRE写作,我们一起来看看吧，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
GRE写作满分要点解析，主要包括以下四点：
每个评卷人对你文章的评阅非常快，不可能对每个细节都很仔细地去看。考生应该迎合评卷人的评卷思路，用最规范的结构和最清晰的表达来体现自己的思路：首段要鲜明地提出观点，中间段落层次要拉开，每段的开始应该就是该段的topic sentence。
为了达到公平，ETS公布了它考试的所有写作题库，那么为了达到能和native speaker一起竞争，考生应该在考前对所有题目都进行预习(节约考试时的审题时间)，并通过100-150个提纲的写作了解GRE写作的一般结构，通过30-50篇写作来练习自己的写作思路和表达。对题库中的题目越熟练，对考试越有利。
首先，从ETS公布的各分数段评分标准看，其评分主要注重以下三个方面：①、逻辑分析能力(要求insightful);②、文章的组织(要求well-organized);③、语言能力(要求standard written English; concise; varied structure等)。
由于AA的写作不牵涉自己观点的展开，只须指出作者逻辑上的漏洞，因此在经过训练以后，写起来并不困难;而AI的写作需要自己展开自己设立的观点，不但需要逻辑上的洞察能力，还需要论证观点的能力，语言组织的能力，因此对于中国考生来讲比较困难，难以短期内有较大提高。
但是这两个部分在总分中的权重是一样的，因此考生的策略应该是尽量提高AI部分的写作能力而力保AA部分满分(或高分)。因为如果AA部分满分的话，AI部分只需争取在4分以上就可以保证整体作文分数在5分以上。
题目：
"It is more important to allocate money for immediate, existing social problems than to spend it on long-term research that might help future generations."
与其花钱进行可能有助于后代的长期性研究，还不如把钱花在迫在眉睫，已经存在的社会问题上。
正文：
In this contradictory era of pleasure and pain, loyalty and treachery, joy of life and fearof future, which arise a considerable of problems government has been bored by. No matter how serious and urgent one aspect turns out to be in a certain period,government is supposed to call for a balance between allocating money for immediateproblems and spending it on long-term research when making budget.
To be responsible for current citizens, government should solve those existing socialproblems, such as unemployment, illiteracy, and social crimes, in order to oil the socialmachine. To some extent, increasing the amount of jobs may get more benefit thanitself, because it is a way to release social pressure and dissatisfaction of thoseunemployed workers who may eventually become a ticklish factor to society.
Additionally, illiteracy is to society as the shortest baffle is to a cask. And it could donothing but lengthen the shortest baffle to the same length as the other baffles if morewater is supposed to be poured in this cask. As a malignant tumor, social crimes do harm to the economy and security of our society and, in some cases, is a potential fuse especially when there is an internal or external opposition to the government, so, to keep society stabilized and booming, government has to pay more attention to social crimes.
If not, citizens may feel under peril and lose confidence to the ruling class. As a result, for saving money, the government is bogged down in Sargasso Sea of troubles.Nonetheless, the governors are not born only for today’s people. That is to say,another significant and meaningful responsibility of government is to try its best to supply our posterity a society that consists of people who are well educated and obtain a desirable job or career, less juvenile crime and drug, and stable economy. As
H.W.Beecher pointed, “We should so live and labor in our time that what came to us as seed may go to the next generation as blossom, and what came to us as blossom may go to them as fruit. This is what we mean by progress.”It is true that long-term research could not give out an immediate value, for example,how to afforest a wasteland, but we shouldn’t be so narrow foci and misprize the real value normally coming up in about decades or more. “Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards”, said by Kierkergaard. The phrase “be lived forwards” here, in this case, means digging out the profit in future, the same as futures. Although no one knows whether or not the future is in concord with what we expect, we still could invest in it based on a pile of wide investigation and a cogent demonstration rather than a gambling.
Simply put, without spending money on immediate and existing social problems, our society cannot keep flourish and robust. Without investing on so many long-term researches, we will live no guarantees and aimless. Therefore, to ensure the stability and health as well as lasting development of our society, spending money on immediate social problems and investing on long-term researches weigh the same.
题目： "Competition is ultimately more beneficial than detrimental to society."
正文：
Darwin suggested that the process of evolution is one based on competition. This deadly competition weeds out the weak and only the fittest of the species survives. Humans, being the product of millions of years of evolution, are by nature, competitive beings. Yet, humans are also social beings. Like the bees in the hive, we are not very successful living completely on our own. We need to cooperate with other individuals for our survival. Thus, a conflict ensues, between our innate competitiveness, and our need to cooperate. There are pros and cons associated with both. However, it is my belief that overall, competition, is more detrimental than beneficial to human society.
First, let us try to identify why there is competition in the first place. In an environment abundant with resources, where supply outstrips demand, there is very little need for the inhabitants to fight with each other over them. This is not the case on planet earth. Resources are limited, and there is constant jostling to get to the front of the queue to get acquire them. For example, thousands of prospective students apply to gain entrance to top universities around the world, but there are only a handful of places in those universities. Thus, there is competition to get into to these hallowed institutions of higher learning.From a utilitarian perspective, competition is a good thing. In evolution it is responsible for the elimination of "weak" genes. In the business environment, it gets rid of the weaker players. In politics, it weeds out unpopular candidates. In academia, it gets rid of weak students.
Furthermore, competition leads to self improvement. Businesses will strive to offer better products and services at lesser prices. The consumer reaps rich rewards from this competitive spirit. Politicians strive to do the utmost for the people, so they would get reelected. Students excel in there studies, trying to outdo each other.
Thus, ostensibly, competition is responsible for the betterment of the society as a whole. However, this is just the superficial view. Underneath the surface, competition, in every aspect, is slowly eating away at the very fabric of the society.
While it is true to say that competition in corporate world has brought great benefits to the consumer, the society as "Missed A here"whole is playing a great price for it. Most businesses are exploiting cheap labour in the third world to maximise their profits. There are thousands of sweatshops run by well known western corporations in countries like Indonesia, Bangladesh and China. People are forced to work in squalid conditions, often 16 hours a day. They are lucky to receive a dollar a day for there labours. The moment a government in any of these countries try to improve the working conditions of the employees, these multinational giants flee the country, often leaving whole communities facing financial ruin. The corporations are aware that there are plenty of other labour markets that could be exploited with gay abandon.
That is just the human cost. What about the environmental costs? Competition has forced many corporations to "stream line" their operations. Environmental standards are normally the first victims of this "stream line" process. A significant amount of environmental pollution and land degradation has been blamed on industry, yet the factories keep producing more and more. Thousands of items go unsold each year due to competition. Only a fraction of this merchandise is recycled. The rest goes to the already overflowing landfills.
In politics, the detrimental effects of competition are blatant. Politicians often resort to popular yet socially damaging policies to gain votes. These measures include imprudent spending to rabble rousing. The current volatility in Israel and Palestine, the ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, and the famine in Zimbabwe are all, at least partially, problems created by politicians to get elected.
It has been said that education is one sphere where competition has always had a beneficial influence. Even this claim is dubious. Due to competition students are less likely to exchange ideas with one another, thus enriching the student population as whole. Furthermore, competition drives students to study well to pass exams, but not to gain wisdom. Students spend many hours preparing for standardised tests; tests which many believe are inherently flawed. Thus, it is often not the most intellectual student who succeeds, but the most competitive.
Competition is an inborn human trait. It has some positive qualities, but overall, it does far more harm than help to the society. As intelligent beings, humans can transcend their evolutionary weaknesses. Thus, humans should rely less competition and more cooperation for the sake of the society.
上一篇：雅思写作如何用连接词起转承合
下一篇：GRE写作评分及常见问题解读
