2017年GRE高分范文100篇【命题分析＋答题攻略＋强化训练】(txt+pdf+epub+mobi电子书下载)

作者：圣才电子书

出版社：圣才电子书

格式: AZW3, DOCX, EPUB, MOBI, PDF, TXT

2017年GRE高分范文100篇【命题分析＋答题攻略＋强化训练】试读：

第1章　GRE考试写作指南

自从1990年在中国实行以来，GRE考试经历了多次变革。2011年8月ETS（美国教育考试服务中心）再次对GRE General Test进行了改革，而此次改革在考试内容、形式和计分方法上均有所体现。

1.1　GRE考试简介

GRE考试（Graduate Record Examinations），中文名字为“美国研究生入学考试／资格考试”，是由ETS（美国教育考试服务中心）主办，全球最广为接受的研究生入学标准考试。

GRE考试共分为两类：General Test \ Aptitude Test（一般能力或倾向性测验）和Subject Test\ Advanced Test（专业测验或高级测验）。

General Test即是平时常说的也是大部分中国学生参加的考试，主要是对考生从事高级阶段学术研究的一般潜在能力进行考查，并不涉及任何专业方面的特殊要求。其目的在于检测考生的Verbal Reasoning（文字推理）、Quantitative Reasoning（数量推理）和Analytical Writing（分析性写作）的能力，而这些技能是在研究生院取得成功所必不可少的。

Subject Test则重点测试考生在某学科领域或专业领域中所获知识和技能水平。

1.2　GRE General Test试卷结构

目前GRE General Test考试有两种测试形式：computer-based test（基于计算机的考试）和paper-based test（基于纸笔的考试）。

改革后的GRE General Test试卷结构如下所示：

◆Structure of the Computer-based GRE revised General Test

基于计算机的GRE General Test包括不计分部分考试时间总共为3小时45分钟，第三部分结束后会有10分钟的休息时间。其中分析性写作的位置比较固定，通常在考试开头，而文字性推理、数量推理和不计分部分则可能以任何顺序出现，因此对于每一部分都需认真对待。

基于计算机的GRE General Test考试在分析性写作之后可能会出现一个unscored section，该部分可能以任何顺序出现。或者research section会代替unscored section出现，其位置经常是在试卷结尾部分，该部分同样不计分。

◆Structure of the Paper-based GRE revised General Test　 基于纸笔的GRE General Test考试时间总长为3小时30分钟，共有6部分构成，第二部分结束后会有10分钟的休息时间。每部分的题目数量和考试时间在考试说明中都会给出。其中分析性写作的位置比较固定，通常在考试开头，而文字性推理和数量推理则可能以任何顺序出现。

1.3　GRE写作试题分析

2011年8月GRE General Test改革在写作方面主要体现在作文题库、题目要求和写作时间方面的变动。Issue话题题库和Argument话题题库在题目数量上均作了调整，Issue话题调整之后变为149道题目（见附录1），而Argument话题缩减为174道题目（见附录2）。此外，写作题目增加了具体的要求，而Issue写作部分的时间也减少至30分钟（之前为45分钟）。

Issue和Argument写作的具体题目要求分别如下：　 ◆Issue写作的六种不同题目要求　 1. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

2. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

3. Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.

4. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

5. Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

6. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

对于Issue写作的六种题目，前五种均包含给出自己的立场（position）的要求，而最后一种虽未直接提出该要求，但也包含了这层意思。前3种题目比较相似，其不同之处在于需根据不同性质题目的具体要求进行回答：第1种题目中可能给出了判断或评价；第2种题目中可能给出了劝告或建议；第3题目中可能给出了政策或策略。第4种题目要求的特别之处在于要求考虑与自己观点相反的另一种看法并给出该不同看法的原因和例子。第5种题目要求对两个不同的观点均进行考虑。第6种题目要求分析是否同意题目中的观点，并给出原因。

◆Argument写作的八种不同题目要求

1. Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions, and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

2. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

3. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.

4. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

5. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.

6. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.

7. 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.

8. Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.　 通过分析可以发现，Argument八种不同的写作要求可以大体上分类四类：分析假设类（Examine Assumptions）、回答问题类（Answer/Address Questions）、提供证据类（Discuss Evidence）和提出其他可能性解释类（Discuss Alternative Explanation）。本书第3章会按照该分类对不同题目要求的Argument写作提供针对性训练。

1.4　GRE写作应试技巧

第2章　ISSUE写作高分范文50篇

◆劝告/建议类

★Topic 1 教育【参考范文】

The issue of whether educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed is complicated. It is true that there is considerable support for the opinion that students should be encouraged to pursue any subject of personal interest. However, educational institutions exist to educate students, and with this goal in mind every step should be taken to ensure that students are successful in their studies. Allowing every student unfettered entry into any field of study would have a deleterious effect on this goal, therefore educational institutions must dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.

One compelling argument in support of the statement is that students should be dissuaded from pursuing fields of study they are unlikely to be successful in because under performing students can have a deleterious effect on the quality of education for all other students in a class. If, contrary to the statement, all students were allowed entry into all fields of study, then the pace of classes would have to be decreased to allow for weaker students. As a result less material would be covered and quality of education would suffer accordingly. Simply stated, allowing students to pursue fields of study they are unlikely to succeed in is imprudent due to the negative effects such a practice would have on the quality of education for all students.

Another meaningful argument concerns the secondary focus of academic institutions. While it is true that education is the primary focus, the goal of student success should always be a close second. When considering that a primary focus of academic institutions is to ensure student success, there is no question that institutions should dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. This is especially true when the youthfulness of the majority of students is taken into account. A number of students are too inexperienced to make prudent academic decisions without assistance from academic institutions. In light of this, rather than allowing students to pursue fields of study that they have been determined to be unlikely to succeed in, institutions should provide guidance for students in finding the fields they are most likely to succeed in. Given the goals of academic institutions, the policy outlined in the statement just makes sense.

Opponents of this view may contend that it is difficult or even impossible to accurately determine which students will be successful in a field of study. For instance, in any field of study students admitted with perfect grade point averages and exam scores are often outperformed by students who only just met entrance requirements. While this point is duly noted, the argument is short-sighted in that it does not change the fact that education quality would still suffer if all students were allowed entry into all fields. Educational institutions regularly have thousands of students and policies that cannot be determined based on statistical outliers.

In light of the above, it becomes clear that in order to best ensure the education quality and success of students, educational institutions are responsible for dissuading students from pursuing fields of study they are unlikely to succeed in. In instituting such a policy, though some students may be discouraged from pursuing fields that they are capable of performing well in, the education quality and success of the student body as a whole would be improved and these goals must remain the most important to educational institutions.【范文解析】　 题目给出的观点是：教育机构有责任劝导学生不去研究他们不太可能成功的领域”。本文同意这一观点，接着论证教育机构为什么要阻止学生任其兴趣发展：1）不限制学生学习的领域会对教学质量产生不良的影响；2）教育机构首要的关注点是保证学生学业成功；3）驳斥与己方相左的观点。最后总结并重申观点。【重点词汇】

·dissuade v. 劝阻，劝止

·unfetter v. 释放；使自由

·deleterious adj. 有毒的，有害的

·imprudent adj. 轻率的，鲁莽的

·outperform v. 胜过；做得比…好

·duly adv. 适当地；充分地

★Topic 2 教育【参考范文】

I suspect that many people would support the statement that facts should not be taught before ideas and concepts. Teaching concepts first may be seen as a way to promote independent thinking. While this may even be true even in the majority of cases, there are situations where teaching facts before their underlying concepts and trends is beneficial to students’ learning. Likewise, there are situations where learning facts is all that is needed, and an understanding of related concepts and ideas is not necessary. Therefore, I disagree with the strong wording of the statement that educators should only teach facts after their students have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts, when there are clearly situations where this is not the case.

First of all, in many cases where knowledge of a fact is necessary, an understanding of its related concepts is not. For example, consider a college course on demographics. In such a course it may be necessary to have knowledge of the fact that in 2008 the American economy began a period of economic recession. Such knowledge would hypothetically allow students to better understand population trends taking place during the period of the recession. On the other hand, an understanding of the labyrinthine economic ideas, trends, and concepts underlying this fact is superfluous for the purposes of the aforementioned students. Hence, contrary to the statement, in some cases it is best to forgo teaching of concepts and ideas when only an understanding of facts is necessary.

Furthermore, while an understanding of the underlying concepts in the example given above is unnecessary, possession of such an understanding would admittedly only benefit students. However, it must also be considered that a workable understanding of the trends and concepts underlying the intricacies of the American economy, and the larger global economy that it is inextricably bound to, may take years of dedicated study to acquire. For all students majoring in subjects other than economics or business, the opportunity cost of such an understanding would outweigh any benefit. Indeed, it is almost always the case that concepts and trends take significantly more time to comprehend than the relatively short investment needed to learn simple facts. Hence, while the wording of the statement insists that it is always the case that students learn concepts before facts, such a suggestion is often impractical given the amount of time necessary to understand those concepts.

Finally, I contend that great benefit can in fact be had by directly contradicting the statement by first exposing students to facts before any related trends and ideas have been learned. Due to the matter that, as stated above, facts are more readily transmissible than difficult concepts and ideas, in reality students are commonly exposed to a large number of facts without having any understanding of related concepts. It is my belief that this practice is beneficial to the learning process because exposure to a variety of facts can, by provoking interest, provide students with the impetus to pursue an understanding of the ideas, trends, and concepts surrounding a particular fact.

In conclusion, the statement is accurate in suggesting that there are often benefits to teaching concepts before facts. However, the argument that facts should only be taught after related concepts have been studied is too strongly worded. This is because, as evidenced above, there are multiple situations where students benefit most by studying concepts after being introduced to facts, or where an understanding beyond that of facts is simply unnecessary or impractical.【范文解析】　 题目中给出的观点是：教师应在学生已学习了有助于解释某些事实的观点、趋势和概念后，再向学生教授这些事实。本文认为这一观点太过绝对，并给出了三方面的论据：1）许多情形下，学习事实已足够，不需学习相关概念；2）理解概念需花费很多时间，因此先学习概念的方法并不可行；3）学习趋势和观点前学习事实，可让学生受益。最后文章重申观点，进行总结。【重点词汇】

·demographics n. 人口统计数据

·hypothetically adv. 假设地

·recession n. 衰退；不景气

·labyrinthine adj. 迷宫的；复杂的

·inextricably adv. 不可避免地；逃不掉地

·impetus n. 动力；促进

★Topic 3 教育【参考范文】

Acquisition of knowledge of various academic disciplines is, as stated in the claim, an excellent way to become truly educated. But, in order to become truly educated, it is necessary to have deep knowledge. Likewise, it is also true that at many universities students are largely limited to taking courses related to their individual fields of study. While such students sacrifice the acquisition of knowledge of various academic disciplines in order to specialize in one field, they remain able to become truly educated. Therefore, while I agree with the claim that universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student’s field of study, I do not agree with the supporting reason that knowledge of various academic disciplines is the best way to become truly educated.

First of all, in my opinion, universities should follow the guidance of the claim and require every student to take a variety of courses outside their field of study because such a policy provides many benefits to students. For example, it enables young students to explore different fields before making the important decision of settling on a path that will have lifelong implications. If students were forced to explore various fields, it would undoubtedly lead to some changing their fields of study as they discover subjects more interesting than their original majors. However, I disagree with the reason stated in support of the claim that acquiring knowledge of a variety of subjects is the best way to become truly educated. In fact, there are numerous methods to become truly educated, and deciding which is best is a matter of opinion.

Secondly, all that is needed to disprove the claim’s supporting reason is to consider the evidence supporting mastery of a single subject, rather than knowledge of various academic fields, as the best way to become truly educated. For example, to be truly educated in the most literai sense would mean that a student has exhausted all existing educational material for a particular subject. Certainly, an individual who has completely mastered a single subject should be regarded at least as educated as an individual who has only superficial knowledge of a variety of topics.

Finally, contrary to the reason, one can become truly educated without ever studying a variety of academic disciplines. This is due to the fact that outside of the realm of academics there exist many fields that require education. An example of such a field is aviation. In order to gain a pilot’s license, one must undergo hundreds of hours of rigorous training and practice, and on the job, training continues for years. In light of all this education, it would be dubious to assert that an experienced pilot is not truly educated in at least one field.

In summary, universities should require students to take a variety of courses outside their field of study, but not because such a policy represents the best way to become truly educated. In contrast, in addition to mastery of a single subject there are many other methods to become truly educated, and deciding which one is best is only a matter of opinion. Furthermore，for one to become truly educated does not mean that one must have knowledge of academic subjects.【范文解析】　 题目给出的观点是：大学应该要求每一名学生在自己的专业外学习多种多样的课程。本文反对这一观点，并提出了自己的观点：大学应该让学生学习专业之外的学科知识，但获得多种学科知识并不是变得有学识的最好方式。接着论述了三个依据：1）大学应该让学生学习专业之外的多种课程，这样做有很多好处；2）专注于一个学科比学习多个学科更容易变得有学识；3）学生不必学习多个学科，也能变得真正有学识。最后文章重现观点，进行总结。【重点词汇】

·mastery n. 掌握；精通

·rigorous adj. 严厉的；严酷的

·aviation n. 航空；飞行术

★Topic 4 社会【参考范文】

I strongly agree that every individual should obey just laws unconditionally and that unjust laws must be amended as soon as possible. However, whether radical actions such as disobedience and resistance are an effective way to revise unjust laws is open to doubt.

Anyone who wants the society to be truly civilized and to run in order will acknowledge that laws must be absolutely obeyed if only they are fair, for laws are the basic guidelines on the behavior of citizens. Yet one would also admit that there are certain unjust laws which will damage the well-being of society or will impede social progress. These laws should be revised through proper means. In my opinion, the solution raised in the claim—disobedience and resistance—is applicable only under certain extreme circumstances, for example, the anti-semitism clauses in German laws during the World War II, and the protection on slavery of the American Constitution before the Civil War. These laws are not only unjust but could be considered evil laws, which undoubtedly deserve resistance. But for other cases, treating unjust laws with these radical actions seems improper.

Some people may argue that the idea of justice is the very foundation of a legal system, thus, any laws that are found unfair or biased must be fought against through whatever means that are necessary.Such position sounds righteous and compelling, however, in-depth examination will reveal the following problems.

First, how should we define just and unjust? People or social groups with different interests and values will surely have different criterion in their judgment.Consider, for example, the controversial issues of abortion and homosexuality. Any laws on these issues might be considered just by one group of people while be considered unjust by another. Second, laws, even those unjust ones, are basic disciplines that ensure the society run in order. Fighting laws through whatever means would probably result in social disturbance and chaos. Granted that radical actions are desirable for the purpose of justice, it would still be infeasible for citizens to resist laws. Imagine, for example, how could bare-handed masses fight with the law enforcement institutions of the government such as the armed police?

Therefore, unjust laws which do not violate basic moral principles but only have minor flaws, or are inconsiderately legislated, should be modified with rational and reasonable approaches. For example, we can perfect the laws through perpetual improvement of the legislation system, or through the supervision of mass media. The Internet also provides us an effective and powerful way to stand for justice and reflect the demand of public.

On the whole, for those unjustified laws which violate the core values upon which a democratic society depends to thrive, and those which harm the well-being of the general public, people should do their very best to amend them. While for slightly flawed or biased rules and regulations, a step-by-step, moderate improvement might be more appropriate. ，【范文解析】　 题目给出的观点是：社会上的每个人都应该无条件地遵守公正的法律，并违反和对抗不公正的法律。本文支持前半部分的观点，但是并不支持违反和对抗这类极端行为。接着给出了以下论据：1）如何界定公正与不公正；2）法律是维系社会秩序的基本规则，即使是不公正的法律也有同样的作用。最后重申文章论点：应该通过合理和理性的手段修正不公正的法律。

试读结束[说明：试读内容隐藏了图片]

下载完整电子书