为什么GRE写作只能到3或3.5分
为什么GRE写作只能到3或3.5分,我们来看看吧,下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
为什么GRE写作只能到3或3.5分
GRE的写作部分被叫做Analytical Writing，作为老师我们都习惯称它为AW部分。这个部分的分数是单独核算的，也就是说，GRE的总分是340+6，而并非346分。
GRE AW部分也是由两篇作文构成，一篇叫做Issue，我们一般称之为立论文;一篇叫做Argument，我们称之为驳论文。你的分数是这两篇文章分数的算数平均数。
GRE写作一直是中国学生的一个比较头疼的单项。一般来说，如果你的GRE写作部分考到4.5分，就已经被人尊崇为大神了;考到4分，也已经有很多同学要来请教你的备考经验了;考到3.5，基本就满意;考的3分也不觉得很差。
但实际上，如果从GRE的一个非常重要的衡量指标percentile(百分位)的角度来看。4.5分的percentile是不错的，达到了82%(数据来源：Analytical Writing Interpretative Data Used on Score Reports 2016);而4分的百分位就一落千丈，来到了60%;3.5分42%;3分则只有18%。换句话说，如果你的GRE写作得了3分，那么在100个人中，你只比18个人考得好，这样的分数，怎么能让人满意呢?
很多同学特别疑惑的一点是，为什么我在托福考试中写作能考到28分甚至30分，但在GRE写作中，却只能考到3分或者3.5分了呢?这是我今天这篇文章想要探究的重点。
在我看来，一个考试的各个单项对于学生水平的要求应该是一致的，只是通过不同的方式反复检测学生的水平是否真的达到了这个标准，以及对于这部分知识的掌握达到了什么程度。让我们用比较简单的方式来解释，也就是说，GRE的阅读和写作，都是在检测你是否达到了合格的研究生入学的标准，只是阅读部分是先检测你是否能够深度理解这个级别的信息，而写作则是希望你能展示出你自己也能构建出这种语言和逻辑水平的内容。
对于托福来说，它主要考察的是学生对于词汇、句子的理解，对于段落间的层次，段落间的逻辑关系考察的不多。相应的，在写作的评估中，对考生文章里的这些方面审核的也就没有那么严格。而GRE就不一样了，在GRE阅读里，就考察了考生对于句间关系，段落分层，段落关系的深刻理解，那么在写作中，你也必须要保证你的文章句间关系是明确的，段落分层是清晰的，段落关系是有逻辑的，所以考试难度自然也就大了很多。
除了考试要求更高之外，GRE的题目难度和考试形式也都比托福提升了不止一个层次。以Issue部分为例，首先，GRE的题目考察的范围比托福更广，范围内考察的深度也更深。尽管托福写作最近也在提升要求，比如上周考的考题：“16-17岁的十一年级学生的暑假安排哪个更好：1. 去上一些他们以后想学专业的大学预备课程;2. 由老师带领去参观博物馆或者是历史古迹，然后写一些论文。(网上回忆)”，这样的题目比官方指南上的例题：“你是否同意：诚实是友情中最重要的品质”要难了一个档次，可是与GRE的题目相比还是要简单不少。
托福的题目，我们即使平时没有思考过这类问题，在考试中临时去思考，也是可以很快成文的。但是碰到一些GRE的题目，如果你平时从来没有思考过，那基本只能是重在参与了。举两个例子：
"Rituals and ceremonies help define a culture. Without them, societies or groups of people have a diminished sense of who they are."
典礼和仪式有助于确立一种文化，否则人们的社会或群体的角色归属感削弱。
"Truly profound thinkers and highly creative artists are always out of step with their time and their society."
真正影响深远的思想家和具有高度创造力的艺术家们总是与他们的时代和社会步伐不一致。
这两道题在GRE写作中也是很普通的题，但可以确定的是，如果你平时从来没有思考过这类问题，临时在考场上的30分钟里，是很难写出一篇逻辑严密的文章来的。
这里多说一句，很多学生跟我探讨过考试中是否可以编例子这个问题，在GRE里我一直都是不建议的，并不是不能编，而是对于GRE写作里考察的这些问题，你很难能编出逻辑缜密的例子。很多时候我们告诫学生不要编，阅卷老师能看出来，并不是说，阅卷老师能看出来你编的例子中人名是假的或是事情是假的，而是他从逻辑的严密性以及信息的准确性上就能轻易看出你这个例子是不靠谱的。
所以，为了准备GRE写作，我们应该要大量的积累案例，积累论据和素材。幸运的是，ETS官方考虑到我们不太可能上知天文下知地理，所以GRE写作的题库是公开的。不幸的是，ETS为了防止我们直接写文章背好了去参加考试，所以Issue题库里有243题，Argument题库里242题，即使我们能把一些比较类似的题目合并，也至少有300多道题要去准备，所以全部写完背下来几乎是不可能的事。但从另一个角度讲，如果你真的把这么多题提前准备好，写完，背诵好了去考试，那ETS的目标其实也就达到了。
下面再简要地谈一下Argument，这部分其实是中国考生比较喜欢的，因为它是给你一篇文章，让你去找文章里的漏洞，再写成文章。我们都知道，中国学生的特性就是擅长批判但不擅长建设，所以在Argument中，找到一些逻辑上的漏洞不难，但难的是系统化的，有方法论指引的去找到文章里的逻辑漏洞。
对于这部分的训练，我个人的理念跟以前还是一样的，那就是整个考试在对于你的逻辑思维能力的考察也是一致的，所以如果你把Verbal部分的逻辑单题做好了，整理出常见的逻辑谬误，那么再去找Argument里的逻辑问题，也就没那么难了。当然，根据登山理论，如果你登上过更高的山峰，再登矮一点的山峰就比较轻松。那么你也可以去做一些GMAT甚至是LSAT的逻辑题，再回来看Argument的文章，眼里就全是逻辑漏洞，再归好类，写出一篇文章也就不算是很难的事了。
关于GRE写作的行文部分，今天的文章就不能详细说了，但你只要认可我的理念：“每一个考试的各个单项对于考生语言和逻辑思维水平的要求是基本一致的，只是在考核能力的不同维度。”那你就知道，GRE的阅读文章其实就是最好的写作范文。所以多看GRE阅读文章，从这些文章中习得一些写作的手法，再运用到写作里，考出一个不错的分数就不是一个遥不可及的梦想了。
以上是我对GRE写作的一些粗浅看法，行文仓促，水平有限，欢迎专家们拍砖。
GRE issue写作优秀实例：个人责任
题目：
The concept of ’individual responsibility’ is a necessary fiction. Although societies must hold individuals accountable for their own actions, people’s behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making.
个人责任的概念是一种很必要的虚构。尽管社会必须让个人对他们自己的行为负责，但是人们的行为很大程度上不是自己能够左右的。
正文：
Admittedly it is true that forces play a vital role in determining people’s behavior, but one should not go too far to deny the equal importance of individual responsibility. In many cases, it is individual responsibility that is at stake, far over the use of forces.
In the first place, forces are not omnipotent and there are many occasions on which forces fail to take effect and therefore must resort to individual responsibility to regulate people’s behavior. Take marital infidelity for example. Undoubtedly, this behavior is immoral and should be condemned because it severely harms the stability of family and thus impacts negative effects on the development of children. However,hardly can the use of compulsory forces such as laws take effect in preventing the occurrence of this disloyal behavior. The reason for impotency of forces on this occasion is that any attempt to prevent marital infidelity has a great possibility to unduly interfere with individual affairs and seriously violate individual freedom.Therefore, the society has no choice but to turn to individual responsibility for marital loyalty and stability of family.
Also there are many cases where only combined with the use of individual responsibility can forces exert their power to the utmost. Laws can require corporations to be responsible for their consumers and thus can partly ensure the legitimate rights of consumers, but whether consumers can enjoy the best products or services primarily depends on the social responsibility of those corporations rather than the use of laws; likewise, laws require individuals to comply with public morality and even set up some regulations to punish behaviors of violating public morality, but without individuals’ identification with these laws and thus the shape of individual responsibility, can hardly these compulsory measures work well. This is why the state of public morality is still very bad in many developing countries although they have set up numerous regulations and laws to punish violation of public morality.
Last but not the least, even under the circumstances where forces play a dominant role in regulating the behavior of people, the society must try its best to cultivate individual responsibility to substitute for the use of forces more or less, because forces are always associated with high social cost and negative effects on the society. If all corporations can follow laws and behave accountable for their consumers, all citizens can act in the interests of nation, all political figures can work for the public benefit automatically, there would be no necessity to maintain such a large-scale compulsory forces—police, army, prison, judge and so on--in the society and as a result, all the social members will greatly benefit from the reduction in social cost.
In conclusion, the above analysis is not intended to deny the role of forces in determining people’s behavior, but to point out that individual responsibility is irreplaceable to ensure the stability and development of any society. Only combined with the use of individual responsibility can the society as a whole will benefit most.
GRE issue写作优秀实例：理性和感性之价值观
题目：
Most people think that their deeply held values are the result of rational choice, but reason often has little to do with the way people form values.
大多数人认为他们深信不疑的价值观是理性选择的结果，但是理智往往对于人们形成价值观几乎根本不起作用。
正文：
Nowadays there increasingly arises much concern about whether reason plays a role in people forming values or not. As the assertion presented by speaker that most people think that their deeply held values are the result of rational choice, but reason often has little to do with the way people form values. Nevertheless, in my opinion, the deeply believed values are the result of rational choice by people as well as their ancestors.
First of all, in the face of different values, people tend to choose one by considering thoroughly and reasonably. One popular example involves people’s rational choice toward the 9.11 terrorism. When the Taliban government proposed and spread the value of terrorism by attacking the Pentagon building, the Americans as well as all other peace-lovers stood out to excoriate the terrorisms with their cold-blooded and brutal terrors. Undeniably, most people chose peace rather than terrorism by reasonable thought. Accordingly, it is via people’ rational, logical, and prudential choice that determine to accept or reject the values newly emerged.
Some may argue that most of people’ deeply held values are chiefly instilled by education, and are profoundly influenced by their own culture. This specious argument demonstrates that people’ values are primarily determined by culture rather than their own choice. Nevertheless, where did these values deprive? Why are they cherished and selected to preserve? The only answer is that all these deeply held values are the reasonable choice by not only our ancestors, but also our modern people. Just take a look into America history, one need look no further to find that without Washington’s rational choice of independence and democracy, or Lincoln’s reasonable choice of equality, or Martin Luther King’s wise choice against racial discrimination, these value as freedom, democracy, and equality would not be so deeply rooted in American’s mind. Consequently, the values that are commonly taken over world such as peace,democracy, love, cooperation and so on, are the very choice of our ancestors and are passed down from a generation to generation.
Some other people in favor of speaker’s assertion may claim that there are also many values determined by the external forces, such as laws, which are beyond people’s free choice. I concede that indeed, every country has carried out a series of various laws for its citizens to abide by in order to assure the stability of society. However, if only one remembered the failure of Prohibition during the 1930s, and more recently,failed federal legislation to regulate access to adult material via the Internet, as well as the innumerable rules and regulations under continuous amending in order to adapt the updated situations, may he or she clearly realize that it is also people’s reasonable consideration to decision which law is feasible to carry out, which law should be edited,and even which law should be abandoned. In short, once people sensibly chose such valuable values as peace, democracy apart from violence and anarchy, a series of systematic and reasonable laws are another desirable rational choice of people,including the values embodied in the laws.
In sum, from the full discussion offered above, we may draw the persuasive conclusion that people’ deeply held values are actually the result of their rational choice, no matter the values imparted by education and preserved by culture, or the values apparently determined by laws, as a matter of fact, all these values are the richness of our entire human legacy chosen, preserved and passed down by one generation to another.
为什么GRE写作只能到3或3.5分相关文章：
