【GRE范文大赏】argument高分作文之

北京GRE培训,GRE备考资料,GRE网课,GRE培训机构,GRE保分班,GRE真题,GRE课程

GRE作文考试最大的特点，便是GRE题库的公开，所有GRE考试中可能会出现的作文题目，都已经事先公布在ETS的GRE官网上。尽管考题公开透明，但庞大的题量，对于想要做好充分准备的考生来说，仍然算得上是巨大的挑战。为了方便广大考生准备GRE作文，下面小编就和大家分享GRE官方真题库中ARGUMENT作文的高分范文，并做全面鉴赏分析。

Arg-22

According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students

is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student

cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to

cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect

that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which

teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an

average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code

was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later,

this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of

Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor

code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt

honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among

students.

【满分范文赏析】

In this report the author concludes that colleges should adopt an honor code

in order to reduce the frequency of cheating. To support this conclusion the

author points out that the first year after switching from a monitoring system

to an honor system the annual number of reported cheating incidents at Groveton

College decreased from 30 (as reported by teachers) to 21 (as reported by

students following the honor code) and that five years later the number

decreased to 14. The author also cites a survey in which most students indicated

they would be less likely to cheat under an honor system than if they are

closely monitored. This argument is unconvincing for several reasons.

【本段结构】

本文采用了标准的Argument开头段结构，即C—A—F的开头结构。本段首先概括原文的Conclusion，之后简要提及原文为支持其结论所引用的一系列Assumption及细节，最后给出开头段到正文段的过渡句，指出原文的Flaw，即这些Assumption无法让原文的结论具有说服力。

【本段功能】

作为Argument开头段，本段具体功能就在于发起攻击并概括原文的结论，即大学应该采取和Groveton College相同的Honor

code制度以用来避免学生们考试作弊的情况。本段接下来提到了原文中为支持之前的Conclusion所提供的证据，即在采用这种制度后，报告的学生作弊人数下降了，以及一个能表明学生们对于考试作弊态度的调查。文章提及这些信息，为是在正文段中对这些Assumption即将进行的具体攻击做铺垫。

First and foremost, the argument relies on the assumptions that Groveton

students are just as capable of detecting cheating as faculty monitors, and that

these students are just as likely to report cheating whenever they observe it.

However, without evidence to substantiate these assumptions one cannot

reasonably conclude that the honor code has, in fact, resulted in a decline in

the incidence of cheating at Groveton.

【本段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第一个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。

【本段功能】

作为正文第一段，本段攻击原文所犯的第一个重要逻辑错误——类比类错误。原文假设，学生们拥有和教师一样的检测出其他学生考试作弊的能力，但事实上这种类比并不一定成立。所以，原文的这个假设是不合理的。

The argument also assumes that during the five-year period, all other

conditions possibly affecting the reported incidence of cheating at Groveton

remained unchanged. Such conditions include the number of Groveton students and

the overall integrity of the student body. After five years it is entirely

possible that these conditions have changed and that the reported decrease in

cheating is attributable to one or more such changes. Thus, without ruling out

such alternative explanations for the reported decrease, the argument fails to

convince me that the honor code has, in fact, contributed to a decline in the

incidence of cheating at Groveton.

【本段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第二个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。

【本段功能】

作为正文第二段，本段攻击原文所犯的第二个重要逻辑错误——类比类错误。原文假设在这五年中，Groveton

College的其它条件并没有改变。但事实上一旦这些条件发生了改变，原文当中的数据和细节信息不足以说明这种防作弊制度的真实效果。所以，原文的关于这种过去和现在的时间类比是不合理的。

<--key-pagebreak-->

Finally, the survey that the author cites might be unreliable in any of three

respects: the author fails to assure us that the survey's respondents are

representative of all college students, the survey results depend on the honesty

and integrity of the respondents and hypothetical predictions about one's future

behavior are inherently less reliable than reports of proven behavior. Lacking

credible evidence from a reliable survey, the recommendation for the widespread

adoption of the honor system becomes invalid.

【本段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构，即先是提及原文的第三个逻辑错误，之后分析该逻辑错误的原因，接下来，进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。

【本段功能】

作为正文第三段，本段攻击原文所犯的第三个重要逻辑错误——样本类错误。原文假设采用的调查是有说服力的，但该调查所抽取的学生样本并不一定是具有代表性的，有可能学生们的回答和他们今后的行为是有差异的。所以，原文的这个样本类假设是不成立的。

In conclusion, to persuade an audience that other colleges should adopt an

honor code in order to reduce cheating, the author must supply clear evidence

that cheating at Groveton decreased after the honor code was instituted there,

and that it is this code that was responsible for the decrease. Finally, to

better assess the reliability of the survey an audience would need specific

information about the survey's sampling methodology.

【本段结构】

本段采用的Argument结尾段结构是单纯的Suggestion结构。即，本段给出了可以增强原文说服力的合理建议Suggestion，包括原文作者需要进一步提供的证据和信息等。

【本段功能】

本段作为Argument结尾段，具体功能为对原文当中的逻辑问题提出建议。段落给出合理的建议包括：作者需要提供证据来表明这样的防作弊机制真的是有效果的;此外，作者需要提供一些更详细的信息来表明原文当中调查的可靠程度。不难发现，结尾段总结提出的建议与正文各段中依次攻击的错误遥相呼应，即分别对应了类比类错误和样本类错误，这使全篇文章显得浑然一体。

【满分要素剖析】

【语言表达】

本文的语言使用规范、清晰，词汇也用得准确地道，并使用多变的句式让考官读起来津津有味，这些都是GRE写作官方的语言要求。同时，文章的结构型语言和内容型语言相得益彰，结构是骨架，内容是血肉，二者完美结合。

1) In this report the author concludes that…

(标志性的Argument开头段引出原文结论的语言表达形式。)To support this conclusion the author points out

that… The author also cites a survey in which… This argument is unconvincing for

several reasons.(标志性的指出文章错误的语言表达。整体开头段是标准的C—A—F的语言和逻辑模版体系。)

2) The argument also assumes that during the five-year period, all other

conditions possibly affecting the reported incidence of cheating at Groveton

remained unchanged. Such conditions include… After five years it is entirely

possible that these conditions have changed and that… Thus, without ruling out

such alternative explanations for the reported decrease, the argument fails to

convince me that…(标志性的过去和现在的类比类错误的语言和逻辑模版体系。)

3) Finally, the survey that the author cites might be unreliable in any of

three respects: the author fails to assure us that the survey's respondents are

representative… the survey results depend on… hypothetical predictions about

one's future behavior are inherently less reliable than reports of proven

behavior. Lacking credible evidence from a reliable survey, the recommendation

for the widespread adoption of the honor system becomes

invalid.(标志性不样本不具有代表性的样本类错误的语言和逻辑模版体系。)

4) In conclusion, to persuade an audience that… the author must supply clear

evidence that… Finally, to better assess the reliability of the survey an

audience would need specific information about the survey's sampling

methodology.(标志性的Argument结尾段Suggestion体系的语言和逻辑模版体系。)

【逻辑结构】

本文的写作体现出了非常严谨的开头段—正文段1、2、3—结尾段的逻辑体系：

(开头段)In this report the author concludes that…

(正文段1)First and foremost, the argument relies on the assumptions that…

(正文段2)The argument also assumes that…

(正文段3)Finally, the survey that the author cites might be unreliable in any of

three respects…

(结尾段)4) In conclusion, to persuade an audience that… the author must supply

clear evidence that…