寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托学术类备考版 › GRE作文互动版 › sybil9889的个人作品集

返回列表

查看: 10845|回复: 4

[主题活动] sybil9889的个人作品集 [复制链接]

sybil9889
UID：3822594

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 53
注册时间: 2017-7-11
精华: 0
帖子: 17

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2017-9-14 21:40:46 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由 sybil9889 于 2017-10-23 11:45 编辑

这里是sybil9889的GRE作文写作练习作品集，欢迎大家来交流
现在距离我的考试时间：2017.12.03还有挺长的时间，但是写作嘛，总是要长期积累，有时间就来练练手。
最近一直在做小学期的project（网上超市系统QAQ），垂死代码中惊坐起，来开一贴写作文～

Affairs always get in the way of life(划掉)，其实是忙不过来

。转考至 2018.03.04

GRE写作, 托福写作

相关帖子

回应
0

使用道具举报

sybil9889
UID：3822594

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 53
注册时间: 2017-7-11
精华: 0
帖子: 17

沙发

发表于 2017-10-21 13:32:02 |只看该作者

本帖最后由 sybil9889 于 2017-10-28 13:47 编辑

[活动] 10月21日托福作文直播课互动帖

Essay topic 3

At some universities, students take part in making decisions about the issues that affect daily life of everyone on campus, such as how many hours that the libraries should be open each day or what kinds of food should be served in the cafeteria. But at some universities, experts are hired to make this decision, students almost never involved. Which approach do you prefer and why?

链接：https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mo ... age=2#pid1781500641

王老师直播课上的思路:
1.Points: Students should be engaged because they can learn to make decisions collectively through democratic procedures.
Value principle: The university should offer learning opportunities for students to develop citizenship skills.

2.Point: Students should not be engaged as reaching consensus among students is costly.
Value principle: Costly solutions should be avoid.

3.Point: Experts should be hired as it's hard for them to collect information about students' perspectives.
Value principle: We should not adapt solutions in which information cost is high.

4.Point: Experts should not be hired as making such decisions does not require professional knowledge.
Value principle: Experts should be hired only if their expertise is necessary.

使用道具举报

tesolchina
UID：2191404

长老一袋

Rank: 8 Rank: 8

声望: 912
寄托币: 6214
注册时间: 2006-2-26
精华: 4
帖子: 2367

板凳

发表于 2017-10-21 23:47:42 |只看该作者

加油屏幕上那些跳跃的公仔能不能删掉一部分好晃眼我年纪大了眼睛经不起折腾 :lol

使用道具举报

sybil9889
UID：3822594

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 53
注册时间: 2017-7-11
精华: 0
帖子: 17

地板

发表于 2017-10-23 12:03:47 |只看该作者

tesolchina 发表于 2017-10-21 23:47
加油屏幕上那些跳跃的公仔能不能删掉一部分好晃眼我年纪大了眼睛经不起折腾

好哒～前天直播的时候，老师您说trivial不太好。是不是trivial带有很强的贬低意味？

其实我的整体思路是大事学生干不好，小事浪费学生时间。

使用道具举报

sybil9889
UID：3822594

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 53
注册时间: 2017-7-11
精华: 0
帖子: 17

5楼

发表于 2018-4-16 02:10:58 |只看该作者

GRE argument 练习

题目：
The following appeared as aneditorialin the student newspaper of Groveton College.
"To combat the recently reported dramatic rise in cheating among college students,colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's, 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 an old-fashioned system in which teachers closely monitored students.Under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. The honor code has proven far more successful: in the first year it was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recentsurveyconducted by theGroveton honor council,a majority of students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without."
Write a response in which you discuss what specificevidenceis needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

我的arguement：

The editorial compared the number of detected cheating cases using two systems and adopted the result of an official survey to reach out that all colleges and universities should adopt the honor codes similar to Groveton’s which helped reduce cheating cases. However, the argument is not thoroughly well-reasoned in some critical points and we should collect more information about the issues discussed above.
Considering the old detection system and new honor codes, it’s obvious that the former is far more restricted and fair because the teachers closely monitored students. In the new honor codes, students may be too embarrassed to notify the faculty member when the cheating person has a close relationship with the student. Much worse, in 5 years or so, students would reach an agreement to screen their friends, thus making the detection more difficult. Besides, two systems may have been applied in different period of time, facing different students, which can cause a great variance to the result. If we want to make the data increasingly reliable, an additional monitoring by teachers should be conducted when using the new honor code, facing the same students and in the same time, and then, compare the number of detected cheating cases.
Another point is that the survey conducted by the Groveton has an inevitable pressure for students who answer it. The editorial didn’t clarify the method it took. Was it anonymous and privacy protected? Students may pretend to behave well in a transparent survey. If we want to know the real thinking of students, a more precise design of the survey is very important. In addition, the number of samples, the variety, and even the gender differences need to be taken into consideration.
The editorial’s conclusion is that all other colleges and universities should adopt the honor codes. However, every university or college has its identical characters which definitely can never simply adopt similar rules. In schools of different levels, students can have unique culture and habit of study. One honor code can’t fix problems properly without necessary adjust. From another aspect, to combat the dramatic rise in cheating among college students. We have to find out the real reason why students cheat and try to teach them proper ways to face challenges in a brave and honest way. If the exam itself is unreasonable, maybe the teachers should make some changes to the exams. It’s the establishment of an honest culture that is essential to solve the problem of college student cheating.

使用道具举报