名師點評：原創(chuàng)新g argument寫作.

　　新gre考試應(yīng)用面更加廣泛，不僅僅適用于理工科的學(xué)生申請北美研究生院。還可以用于商學(xué)院的錄取，改革后的新g argument寫作題目更加具體，考察考生是否有融合性思維和分析寫作能力的同時論據(jù)充分不顯空洞，下面是小編為大家搜索整理考生原創(chuàng)新g argument寫作名師點評。

　　以下是小編搜索整理的有關(guān)新gre考試argument寫作范文，要想將argument寫作論證透徹，能夠充分融合批判性思維和分析寫作能力將文章思維表達(dá)清楚，大家可能感覺會很吃力，以下是名師點評一位考生的argument寫作實例：

　　Argument的題目是：

　　The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institute, to the college&aposs governing committee."We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But 80 percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the students government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."

　　Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

　　該考生Argument的全文如下(考生原創(chuàng)回憶)：

　　The recommendation made by the president and administrative staff of a private institution to the college&aposs governing committee claimed that the century-old tradition of all-female education are supposed to maintain instead of admitting men into its program. The claim seems to be well-reasoned and trustworthy at the first glance, however,considering the weak evidence provided by the institution, the conclusion is unconvincing and unreliable.

　　The institution has failed to take opinions from other groups into consideration. It is mentioned in the recommendation that a majority of faculty members indeed voted for coeducation, believing that the change is about to stimulate more students to apply to Grove. The call for coeducation in this college is neglected by the institution for it focuses on the results of a survey conducted by the student government. The scope, number and range of the students responded to the interview are never known to us, what&aposs more, whether the sample questions appeared on the survey are representative is very questionable. It is very likely that the survey is conducted among a small group of student who strongly advocate preserving the long tradition of all-female education. Correspondingly, the number of 80 percent is meaningless if we are kept in dark of the exact numbers of these interviewees.

　　Supposing it is the fact that many people want to keep the tradition unchanged, there is no direct connection between keeping the tradition and improving morale among students. The reason why the respondents are unwilling to admit men into its program might come from the fear that women are overcome by men or from the avoidance of rearrangement of the curriculum. It is true that over half of the alumni interviewed also opposed coeducation. At this time, a separate survey was conducted. Naturally, some questions are aroused in our heads. What are the differences between the survey conducted by the student government and the separate survey carried out among alumni? How many alumni have participated in the research? It is more likely that the contents of two surveys are different, as a consequence, the results of two researches couldn&apost be added up together simply. What&aposs more, whether the alumni supporting the college financially have been investigated in the survey is irresolute. What if the less half of the alumni maintain to provide financial support to the college are in favor of coeducation? Therore, keeping the long history tradition is likely to impair the financial support rather than strengthen it.

　　Overall, the conclusion drawn by the private institution is unreliable for the foundation of the outcome is unstable and unconvincing. Bore any final decision is made about the change of the long traditions of all-male education, the college&aposs governing committee are required to take all possible alternatives into consideration.

　　由這篇Argument來看，該考生的運氣是不錯的，因為這個Argument題目的推理/論證謬誤相對較為明顯，基本上就兩個：第一，調(diào)查統(tǒng)計類謬誤;第二，因為前提到結(jié)論的過大跨越而導(dǎo)致的"邏輯推不出"的謬誤。

　　同該考生的Issue作文比，考生對自己的這篇Argument的寫作顯然信心十足。這從考生對前述兩個邏輯謬誤的描述和論證可以清楚地看出來。

　　我在這里想強調(diào)的是：Argument的寫作絕對不僅僅是簡單地找尋題目中的邏輯漏洞;更重要的是要對那些邏輯謬誤之所以為謬誤的論證。做到這一點，至少有三件事要做：第一，指出邏輯謬誤;第二，舉例說明邏輯謬誤的存在;第三，提供別樣解釋(alternative explanations)來展示邏輯謬誤。在這三方面，這個考生做的都不錯，對題目中論者的邏輯鏈做了清晰的梳理和充分的論證。獲得更多gre考試咨詢點擊進(jìn)入>>>>澳際免費咨詢顧問或聯(lián)系QQ客服：

　　最可貴的是，顯然因為信心和從容的緣故，考生的語言表達(dá)流暢多了，盡管仍有些不必要的小問題。這為考生Argument的分析自然更增亮色。

　　綜合總體水平，上述兩篇作文得5分應(yīng)該不算意外。

　　以上即是關(guān)于考生的新gre考試argument寫作實例點評篇，希望以上信息能給大家?guī)韼椭?。小編提醒廣大考生面對argument寫作一定不要慌張，調(diào)整好狀態(tài)，理清思路才是關(guān)鍵。

　　2011新gre考試實施以來，很多考生都感到茫然，特別是寫作部分，以上考生原創(chuàng)新g argument寫作語言表達(dá)流暢，對題目中論者的邏輯鏈做了清晰的梳理和充分的論證，所以備考新g argument寫作時增強語言功底的同時還要勤于思考分析。

你還關(guān)心：

新gre須知：有關(guān)MY GRE ACCOUNT注冊步驟

名師指導(dǎo)：3個備考新g作文題庫issue寫作建議

專家解析：赴美留學(xué)申請材料寄送常見問題