說到GRE寫作備考，因為有著官方題庫作為基礎，因此許多人的觀點都是多練就行。然而實際上考生想要練好作文，只靠對著題庫練習還遠遠不夠。下面就由小編來為大家介紹一些更有效果的寫作備考實用技巧。

GRE寫作高分復習攻略解讀 這4個練筆注意事項不能忘

寫作備考要注意限時訓練

對于任何的考試都是一樣，練習不僅要趁早，還需要在練習的時候加強對寫作模式的總結。有很多人都以為剛開始寫好一點花多長時間都值得其實到后來發(fā)現(xiàn)根本不是這樣，限時和不限時兩種感覺完全不同。限時之后就會發(fā)現(xiàn)，GRE考試沒有固定的套路在三十分鐘內基本不可能完整的寫出一篇從沒見過的argument.這里的套路不是大家都熟知的在網上和書上流行的摸版。而是自己總結出來的一套寫作模式，更重要的是思維模式。

GRE作文少用模板鍛煉個人風格

小編建議大家寫作盡量少用模版，因為每個人要有自己的寫作套路，別人的模版盡量不要直接拿來用，畢竟那些還是別人的東西，最好自己能弄出來自己的風格來。而寫作套路，就是仁者見仁，智者見智的事情了，練習作多了，提綱列多了，基本就出來了。

積累寫作經驗需要多加練習

對于GRE寫作來說，想要得到高分就必須要勤加練習，通過練習我們能夠得出自身的不足點，也能發(fā)現(xiàn)自己的寫作優(yōu)勢。所以，在復習GRE寫作的時候，一定要多加練習。

寫完文章還要認真修改做好總結

寫完之后立即改;自己改完之后再請別人改;放一段時間以后再回過頭來自己改。修改多次之后自然會有提高，多掌握一些GRE詞匯量。最好，平時一定要注意積累。句型、短語和相關單詞的收集和分類很重要。比如對教育類的主題，一些的單詞和短語是比較有針對性的，單詞和短語最好從報紙、網頁、國外的范文里或者網上經典文章里搜集，如果自己亂猜亂湊可能適得其反，而且每次用都覺得心里七上八下。

GRE寫作滿分范文1

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?

accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

The?notion?that?protective?gear?reduces?the?injuries?suffered?in?accidents?seems?at?first?glance?to?be?an?obvious?conclusion.??After?all,?it?is?the?intent?of?these?products?to?either?provent?accidents?from?occuring??in?the?first?place?or?to?reduce?the?injuries?suffered?by?the?wearer?should?an?accident?occur.??However,?the?conclusion?that?investing?in?high?quality?protective?gear?greatly?reduces?the?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident?may?mask?other?(and?potentially?more?significant)?causes?of?injuries?and?may?inspire?people?to?over?invest?financially?and?psychologically?in?protective?gear.??

First?of?all,?as?mentioned?in?the?argument,?there?are?two?distinct?kinds?of?gear?-?preventative?gear?(such?as?light?reflecting?material)?and?protective?gear?(such?as?helmets).??Preventative?gear?is?intended?to?warn?others,?presumably?for?the?most?part?motorists,?of?the?presence?of?the?roller?skater.??It?works?only?if?the?"other"?is?a?responsible?and?caring?individual?who?will?afford?the?skater?the?necessary?space?and?attention.??Protective?gear?is?intended?to?reduce?the?effect?of?any?accident,?whether?it?is?caused?by?an?other,?the?skater?or?some?force?of?nature.??Protective?gear?does?little,?if?anything,?to?prevent?accidents?but?is?presumed?to?reduce?the?injuries?that?occur?in?an?accident.??The?statistics?on?injuries?suffered?by?skaters?would?be?more?interesting?if?the?skaters?were?grouped?into?those?wearing?no?gear?at?all,?those?wearing?protective?gear?only,?those?wearing?preventative?gear?only?and?those?wearing?both.??These?statistics?could?provide?skaters?with?a?clearer?understanding?of?which?kinds?of?gear?are?more?beneficial.??

The?argument?above?is?weakened?by?the?fact?that?it?does?not?take?into?account?the?inherent?differences?between?skaters?who?wear?gear?and?those?who?do?not.??If?is?at?least?likely?that?those?who?wear?gear?may?be?generally?more?responsible?and/or?safety?conscious?individuals.??The?skaters?who?wear?gear?may?be?less?likely?to?cause?accidents?through?careless?or?dangerous?behavior.??It?may,?in?fact,?be?their?natural?caution?and?repsonsibility?that?keeps?them?out?of?the?emergency?room?rather?than?the?gear?itself.??Also,?the?statistic?above?is?based?entirely?on?those?who?are?skating?in?streets?and?parking?lots?which?are?relatively?dangerous?places?to?skate?in?the?first?place.??People?who?are?generally?more?safety?conscious?(and?therefore?more?likely?to?wear?gear)?may?choose?to?skate?in?safer?areas?such?as?parks?or?back?yards.??

The?statistic?also?goes?not?differentiate?between?severity?of?injuries.??The?conclusion?that?safety?gear?prevents?severe?injuries?suggests?that?it?is?presumed?that?people?come?to?the?emergency?room?only?with?severe?injuries.??This?is?certainly?not?the?case.??Also,?given?that?skating?is?a?recreational?activity?that?may?be?primarily?engaged?in?during?evenings?and?weekends?(when?doctors'?offices?are?closed),?skater?with?less?severe?injuries?may?be?especially?likely?to?come?to?the?emergency?room?for?treatment.???

Finally,?there?is?absolutely?no?evidence?provided?that?high?quality?(and?presumably?more?expensive)?gear?is?any?more?beneficial?than?other?kinds?of?gear.??For?example,?a?simple?white?t-shirt?may?provide?the?same?preventative?benefit?as?a?higher?quality,?more?expensive,?shirt?designed?only?for?skating.??Before?skaters?are?encouraged?to?invest?heavily?in?gear,?a?more?complete?understanding?of?the?benefit?provided?by?individual?pieces?of?gear?would?be?helpful.

The?argument?for?safety?gear?based?on?emergency?room?statistics?could?provide?important?information?and?potentially?saves?lives.??Before?conclusions?about?the?amount?and?kinds?of?investments?that?should?be?made?in?gear?are?reached,?however,?a?more?complete?understanding?of?the?benefits?are?needed.??After?all,?a?false?confidence?in?ineffective?gear?could?be?just?as?dangerous?as?no?gear?at?all.??

Commentary??

This?outstanding?response?demonstrates?the?writer's?insightful?analytical?skills.??The?introduction,?which?notes?that?adopting?the?topic's?fallacious?reasoning?could?".??爄nspire?people?to?over?invest?financially?and?psychologically?in?protective?gear,"?is?followed?by?a?comprehensive?examination?of?each?of?the?argument's?root?flaws.??Specifically,?the?writer?exposes?several?points?that?undermine?the?argument:??

--?that?preventive?and?protective?gear?are?not?the?same?

--?that?skaters?who?wear?gear?may?be?less?prone?to?accidents?because????they?are,?by?nature,?more?responsible?and?cautious?

--?that?the?statistics?do?not?differentiate?by?the?severity?of?the????injuries?

--?that?gear?may?not?need?to?be?high-quality?to?be?beneficial??

The?discussion?is?smoothly?and?logically?organized,?and?each?point?is?thoroughly?and?cogently?developed.??In?addition,?the?writing?is?succinct,?economical,?and?generally?error-free.??Sentences?are?varied?and?complex,?and?diction?is?expressive?and?precise.???

In?sum,?this?response?exemplifies?the?very?top?of?the?6?range?described?in?the?scoring?guide.??If?the?writer?had?been?less?eloquent?or?provided?fewer?reasons?to?refute?the?argument,?the?paper?could?still?have?received?a?6.?

GRE寫作滿分范文2

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

The?argument?presented?is?limited?but?useful.??It?indicates?a?possible?relationship?between?a?high?percentage?of?accidents?and?a?lack?of?protective?equipment.??The?statistics?cited?compel?a?further?investigation?of?the?usefulness?of?protective?gear?in?preventing?or?mitigating?roller-skating?related?injuries.??However,?the?conclusion?that?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment?would?"greatly?reduce.risk?of?being?severely?injured"?is?premature.??Data?is?lacking?with?reference?to?the?total?population?of?skaters?and?the?relative?levels?of?experience,?skill?and?physical?coordination?of?that?population.??It?is?entirely?possible?that?further?research?would?indicate?that?most?serious?injury?is averted?by?the?skater's?ability?to?react?quickly?and?skillfully?in?emergency?situations.??

Another?area?of?investigation?necessary?before?conclusions?can?be?reached?is?identification?of?the?types?of?injuries?that?occur?and?the?various?causes?of?those?injuries.??The?article?fails?to?identify?the?most?prevalent?types?of?roller-skating?related?injuries.??It?also?fails?to?correlate?the?absence?of?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment?to?those?injuries.??For?example,?if?the?majority?of?injuries?are?skin?abrasions?and?closed-head?injuries,?then?a?case?can?be?made?for?the?usefulness?of?protective?clothing?mentioned.??Likewise,?if?injuries?are?caused?by?collision?with?vehicles?(e.g.?bicycles,?cars)?or?pedestrians,?then?light-reflective?equipment?might?mitigate?the?occurences.??However,?if?the?primary?types?of?injuries?are?soft-tissue?injuries?such?as?torn?ligaments?and?muscles,?back?injuries?and?the?like,?then?a?greater?case?could?be?made?for?training?and?experience?as?preventative?measures.??

Commentary??

This?strong?response?gets?right?to?the?work?of?critiquing?the?argument,?observing?that?it?"indicates?a?possible?relationship"?but?that?its?conclusion?"is?premature."??It?raises?three?central?questions?that,?if?answered,?might?undermine?the?soundness?of?the?argument:??

--?What?are?the?characteristics?of?the?total?population?of?skaters??--?What?is?the?usefulness?of?protective?or?reflective?gear?in????preventing?or?mitigating?rollerskating-related?injuries??--?What?are?the?types?of?injuries?sustained?and?their?causes???

The?writer?develops?each?of?these?questions?by?considering?possible?answers?that?would?either?strengthen?or?weaken?the?argument.??The?paper?does?not?analyze?the?argument?as?insightfully?or?develop?the?critique?as?fully?as?required?for?a?6?paper,?but?the?clear?organization,?strong?control?of?language,?and?substantial?degree?of?development?warrant?more?than?a?score?of?4.?

GRE寫作滿分范文3

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

Although?the?argument?stated?above?discusses?the?importance?of?safety?equipment?as?significant?part?of?avoiding?injury,?the?statistics?quoted?are?vague?and?inconclusive.??Simply?because?75?percent?of?the?people?involved?in?roller-skating?accidents?are?not?wearing?the?stated?equipment?does?not?automatically?implicate?the?lack?of?equipment?as?the?cause?of?injury.??The?term?"accidents"?may?imply?a?great?variety?of?injuries.??The?types?of?injuries?one?could?incur?by?not?wearing?the?types?of?equipment?stated?above?are?minor?head?injuries;?skin?abrasions?or?possibly?bone?fracture?of?a?select?few?areas?such?as?knees,?elbows,?hands,?etc.?(which?are?in?fact?most?vulnerable?to?this?sport);?and/or?injuries?due?to?practising?the?sport?during?low?light?times?of?the?day.??During?any?physically?demanding?activity?or?sport?people?are?subjected?to?a?wide?variety?of?injuries?which?cannot?be?avoided?with?protective?clothing?or light-reflective?materials.??These?injuries?include?inner?trauma?(e.g.,?heart-attack);?exhaustion;?strained?muscles,?ligaments,?or?tendons;?etc.??Perhaps?the?numbers?and?percentages?of?people?injured?during?roller-skating,?even?without?protective?equipment,?would?decrease?greatly?if?people?participating?in?the?sport?had?proper?training,?good?physical?health,?warm-up?properly?before?beginning?(stretching),?as?well?as?take?other?measures?to?prevent?possible?injury,?such?as?common-sense,?by?refraining?from?performing?the?activity?after?proper?lighting?has?ceased?and?knowing?your?personal?limitations?as?an?individual?and?athlete.??The?statistics?used?in?the?above?reasoning?are?lacking?in?proper?direction?considering?their?assertions?and?therefore?must?be?further?examined?and?modified?so?that?proper?conclusions?can?be?reached.??

Commentary??

This?adequate?response?targets?the?argument's?vague?and?inconclusive?"statistics."??The?essay?identifies?and?critiques?the?illogical?reasoning?that?results?from?the?misguided?use?of?the?argument's?statistics:??

--?that?non-use?of?equipment?may?be?"automatically"?assumed?to?be?the????cause?of?injury?

--?that?"accidents"?may?refer?to?minor?injuries?

--?that?injuries?may?result?from?other?causes?--?skating?in?the?dark,????failure?to?train?or?warm-up?properly,?failure?to?recognize?one's????physical?limitations??

The?writer?competently?grasps?the?weaknesses?of?the?argument.??The?ideas?are?clear?and?connected,?but?the?response?lacks?transitional?phrases.??Development,?too,?is?only?adequate.??

Control?of?language?is?better?than?adequate.??The?writer?achieves?both?control?and?clarity?and?ably?conforms?to?the?conventions?of?written?English.??Overall,?though,?this?4?response?lacks?the?more?thorough?development?that?would?warrant?a?score?of?5.

GRE作文高分復習攻略解讀 這4個練筆注意事項不能忘相關文章：